AIBU to think that this is political and should not be supported by a state school

[FlamingoCroquet]

(I have name-changed as this is very identifiying to any other parents or teachers from the same school. But I've been on here for 8 years)

DC's primary school informed us in the newsletter that the school is supporting a scheme to provide aid - specifically a backpack of items - to unaccompanied boys age 11-17 at the Jungle camp at Calais, in partnership with an organisation called Calais Action. They are asking parents/children to donate. This is to coincide with Refugee Week.

I'm very uneasy about this. I don't want to get into an argument about the whole migrant/refugee debate, but I feel that this is a political action and should not be supported by a state school. I am not against helping refugees in general, and would not complain if they were raising money for the Red Cross or Medicins Sans Frontieres. But I have major misgivings about supporting a group called Calais Action.

I'm thinking about emailing the school governors to raise my complaint, but I'm reluctant to be seen as that person who is anti-charity, when my DD has several years left at this school. What do you think?

Ok -

So you there have been questions of "why don't they claim asylum in france?" - it is an extraordinarily long and difficult process, one that until very recently took around 3 years to go through.

I visited the refugee camp in Dunkirk as a journalist this winter and I was completely appalled at the conditions there and the REAL LIFE NON POLITICAL stories that the residents told us. We heard the story of one lone mother who travelled with her 3 small children to France after her husband was killed by ISIS - he told her to flee as they were coming for them next - who suffered a miscarriage alone, living in swamp like conditions in freezing temperatures, only to be rushed to hospital, young children in tow and then turfed out hours later alone and scared. These stories are not uncommon. Please try to look behind the politics of the situation and more at the real lives that will benefit from it.

- this is drone footage from Homs in Syria. Maybe you will feel a little more compassion when you have an idea of what they are running from.

If anyone would like to see the article we produced then feel free to PM, dont want to post here for obvious reasons.

But giving backpacks to unaccompanied children is not letting them in, is it... And frankly, if someone is willing to send their child halfway across the world, unaccompanied, then where they are coming from must be pretty fucking awful. Would you really happily send these children back to such a place, to the people who packed them off? What about drowning refugees? Should they instead always be left to drown and their dead bodies just cleared off our beaches and thrown away? That might put them off trying... It might also put people off beach holidays and cause a bit of a health hazard?...

bilbul - this isn't about letting them in. It's not about them invading your cosy, racist corner of middle England. It's about SENDING A VULNERABLE CHILD A FUCKING TOOTHBRUSH.

I'm sure the Nazis thought along similar lines. "Yeah, what we need to do, right, is make the concentration camps as horrible as possible. That will deter people from being Jewish"

MrsShepherd, you didn't explain why they are choosing to live in the conditions you described rather than go to an official camp where there can be looked after in good conditions safe from Isis and traffickers until their application for asylum is processed?

No one is denying conditions in Syria aren't grim, but they are in one of the safest countries in the world now.

Where are the safe official camps with good conditions?

None of the people in the French camps are Syrian.

Very few people who walked into Europe last year were Syrian - 2 out 10 I believe.

This makes me think that the Syrians left well before the worst of the bombing (those that could afford to) to North America. Most went to camps in Beirut, Lebanon and Jordan.

peachpudding - they are in one of the safest countries yes, but they are not being looked after. The french police placed a blockade on the camp this winter, preventing vital aid reaching the people living there.

The reason why many of these people have chosen these camps in northern france are tenfold. Many of the residents have links to the UK as it is - relatives or friends who are already settled there, or in many cases one member of the family (usually the father) has already been granted refugee status in the UK but have returned to bring their respective wives and children to a safer place.

Whilst it doesn't sound particularly endearing, we also must recognise that as one of the biggest global powers many are attracted to the UK as their final destination as they believe they will be able to build a better life than in countries along their journey such as Turkey or Greece.

Lastly, the people I spoke to there told me of the persecution they have faced in the countries they had travelled through by local people. The racist attacks and torments that had been directed at them throughout their journey. Most of the volunteers in the Dunkirk camp are British, and the refugees told us that the British people have been the ones to show them the most empathy. Contrasting particularly with the appalling treatment that they have been receiving in France.

DianaRoss - that is completely untrue. The overwhelming majority of the residents are Syrian. The others are running from equally despicable circumstances in other countries.

inews.co.uk/essentials/news/syrian-refugee-16-calais-worse-syria/

Sounds like fun doesn't it? And where are these lovely safe camps that people are supposed to go?

Ok MrsShepherd you are saying they are not being looked after. Isnt that because they are refusing to register as refugees in France and are living in illegal camps.

You say police blockaded the camp, wasn't that because they were trying to get onto trucks, boats and trains illegally?
You say its because they want into the UK as they have relatives here. Well why don't they register in France and apply to move to the UK?

You say they are attracted to the UK because its a global power, well last time I looked so was France.

So I am still wondering why a 'refugee' would chose to live in an illegal camp rather than claim asylum in France, get citizenship, an income, health care, schools etc and then if they so chose come to the UK legally.

peachpudding - as i explained before, the process to apply for refugee status in France can take years and years. They don't have that time. That coupled with the racism and prejudice they are experiencing in France wouldn't give me much incentive not to try somewhere else.

The police actually prevented the aid from reaching the refugees as they 'didn't want the place to seem attractive to other refugees' in the hope they would not settle there.

Isnt that because they are refusing to register as refugees in France and are living in illegal camps.

Who is 'they' ? Is it those pesky kids who are just waiting it out in squalor in order to get their hands on a backpack of second hand clothes and toothbrushes?

peachpudding: where do you think these "safe official camps" are?

They don't exist. Dunkerque is as good as it gets but that's beyond full and won;'t be expanded. The French government are treating these people shamefully. In Calais they refuse to create an official camp - other than the few shipping containers (what an awful sick joke, making refugees, many of whom were smuggled across borders in such containers, live in metal boxes made for goods) which are full and have a long waiting list. The Mayor of Paris has recently agreed to set up a similar camp to Dunkerque within Paris, but that is a long way off actually happening.

Quite where do you think these safe camps are?

I looked up a french website and yes it can take 2 years to get full refugee status but the prefectures issue a temporary authorisation to reside in France within a maximum of 15 days after the applicant’s visit.

I am not against helping these refugees but questioning the method. Why don't these charities build safe legal camps, why are they contributing to illegal ones?

I for one have no doubt that the way these folk are being treated/perceived would be VERY different if they were of white European Judeo-Christian descent.

I looked up a french website and yes it can take 2 years to get full refugee status but the prefectures issue a temporary authorisation to reside in France within a maximum of 15 days after the applicant’s visit.

Exactly, peach. And how long do you think it takes to get refugee status in UK? France is proud to be inclusive and secular. The latter may be the reason they don't want to settle in France, because religious dress in public places is not allowed. Like the chap on the radio who said that once he had got his refugee papers from France, he moved his family to England and he loves England because "wife can be muslim woman".

I do not believe that most in the French camps are Syrian. They may have told you that of course. Only 2 out 10 of the people who walked into Germany & Austria were Syrian and the media commented that Mrs Merkel's kind gesture was originally towards the war areas of Syria and Iraq and how few were actually from those countries.

peachpudding

The cahrities don't build safe, legal camps becasue the French authorities do not allow them to. It's that simple. In Dunkerque they got lucky with a sympathetic mayor, Damien Careme. he built the camp alongside charities and NGOs against the wishes of the French governemnt, who refuse to pay a penny towards it.

Well of course the French govt didnt want to build camps because there is no need for them. Others who have requested asylum in France were taken into the system, processed and given food and shelter.

If a few of the camp dwellers do have a close relative in England who has Permission to Remain, then it is up to that person to hire a solicitor and start the process. If done in a systematic, orderly way with evidence of paperwork the person in the camp would be interviewed in France at the British Embassy perhaps, case would be proven, he would be removed and transported to England. It's a process, whatever you think your status is.

No need for camps, yet there are thousands of people living in the Jungle, thousands more in Grande-Synthe, thousands more in Paris, thousands more in the small camps.

The Frnech governemnt may state that asylum seekers are given accomodation. That is simply not the case in practice. Many Jungle residents are waiting for their asylum applications in France to be processed: a refugee couple recently had their first baby in Calais and were discharged from hospital to the jungle with a 2 day old newborn. They had already claimed asylum in France and were not housed, despite having a brand new baby and mum having medical issues from torture in her home country. Thanks to grassroots volunters and fundraising they were housed elsewhere for a short while so mum could recover a bit. They're now back in the jungle.

I love that you think it's so easy for "the process" to tick through. It really isn't. The asylum process is broken. Even unaccompanied minors in the Jungle, with prioven relatives in England cannot get over here becasue "the process" isn;'t working. thankfully the Dubs amendment should address that, but it comes too late for many, like the 15 year old boy who died in the back of a lorry trying to get to his sister in England.

Pingu above is absolutely right. I am in France and involved with a group that has been set up to send aid to refugee groups in France. Many asylum seekers, whose claims are registered, are on the streets or living in makeshift camps. It's a difficult and timeconsuming process to navigate, and understandably many refugees have become wary of authorities given very heavy handed policing including liberal use of teargas in areas where young children were sheltering. I have heard first hand, from people I trust, of minors being removed by police, driven some distance and dumped minus their coat and shoes.

I am surprised that the OP considers Calais Action more "political" than MSF, which has been the one major charity to stand by its principles and condemn the way that the crisis has been handled by the European Union and the UN. For this reason it is now the only major "household name" charity involved in the refugee crisis to which I will personally donate.

Flamingo I've read everything you've written in this thread and I'm sorry to say but you are either really deluded - so please educate yourself some more about the situation in France or you have totally confused yourself on what your school is trying to do.

At the end of the day, we can politic about everything. EVERYTHING.

It's what you do that matters and just because you don't want to. Fine Which you are perfectly entitled to. Doesn't mean your school shouldn't either. Doesn't matter if the destitute boys is from England/France/Syria or the Moon. They are still children. They are still fucking human beings like the rest of us. And I speak as a former Vietnamese non-English speaking refugee child who came here in the 70s with nothing other than my clothes on me and I can tell you I have never ever relied on the state to support me beyond leaving University (I even pay for my own private dental and private medical treatments). And I've always paid my taxes. And I'm bloody grateful to England. My point is. You can't discriminate. Because that's what you are doing - especially when it comes to children.

It took me 10 years to get a British Passport and I was a legitimate refugee. It's aint that fucking easy folks!!

Those staing this is not a charity are right, there are no official individually registered charities working in Calais at the moment. A large part of this is down to the time it takes to actually fill in the charity application form and have it processed, something I'm in the middle of doing for a unregistered charitable organisation working in Calais right now.

Prism is a registered charity, and a damn fine one at that. They provide the administrative support for a lot of the organisations working on the ground. Performing due diligence, handing their money and keeping accounts that satisfy the charity commission, and leaving the people running the different specific prganisations (15 at the last count) focussed on proving the aid that is really needed on the ground

Something no one has explained to me - why are all these refugees so determinedly avoiding these lovely, warm, safe comfy French camps, refusing to go through the straightforward French asylum process, and engaging in grand conspiracies etc etc to get into England?

What do Team Anti-Refugee think is so bleeding special about this country above everywhere else in Europe?

Extra question - what makes us so special that unlike every other European nation, we shouldn't take our share of the vulnerable in time of crisis?