Calais migrants could end up in Dover

[allegretto]

Ironic really but the mayor of Calais has said that she no longer wants to pay/enforce the border controls on the French side of the Channel (and why should she?) Rather than fewer migrants, this result has literally opened the gates.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/25/calais-mayor-calls-for-migrant-camps-to-be-moved-to-britain-foll/

The French government have already said this will not happen.

They want to keep the border at Calais secure, because to do otherwise would increase flow of immigrants into France attempting to reach the UK.

It has nothing to do with the impact it will/will not have on the UK.

Don't the Airlines get fined if they bring into the country people with no papers that then claim asylum? Surely the same would apply to Eurostar/the ferries. They'll just have to increase their own procedures, maybe some kind of online check-in with passport details same as Ryanair do.

and anyway even if all those people did make it from the jungle to Dover, they're hardly going to stay there are they? They'll make their way to London or wherever they have relatives/Think that they can get a job and somewhere to live.

kelandry
I do understand you guys are utterly frustrated. It is also very much possible that you don't see Long term benefits of EU work there so far. But why In the world did that mean you will be able to get Westminister to do it instead? You voted Leave and now Westminister have one more excuse not to spend money and do more cuts: they will say oh we have to make up for the £250 billion wipes off of the economy that the Bank of England had to pay for. What the hell is so hard to understand in this?

Unforeseen consequence. Never mind it's democracy innit.

Actually, I think it was foreseen, but the suggestion that this might happen was just poopooed like all of the other potential risks.

It's not just the asylum seekers in Calais that will end up here. At present, we are signatories to an EU agreement that means that the EU country in which a person seeking asylum is first encountered by the authorities (ie, fingerprinted) is responsible for deciding their claim, even if that person travels on to another EU country and makes their claim for asylum there. We currently remove thousands of people back to other EU countries.

Leave the EU and we lose this facility.

The French don't deport them. They let them build a camp. They drive any illegals taken out of trucks out of sight and let them go to come back to the jungle. I think many of you underestimate the UK, I for one would gladly take another route to France, Calais is a shithole now anyway. The channel tunnel can be for our exports/people but not for return taffic if they refuse to secure our border. And we have shown Europe how we react when bullied, the French won't get any further than Junker did.

The Mayor of Calais should also be careful what she wishes for (along with the Leavers) - if Calais police stop enforcing the safety of lorries and cars travelling to/from Europe via Calais, then other routes will become more attractive and her town's economy will collapse. I live in Kent and last summer I know people who were travelling to/from France on holiday were deliberately avoiding going via Calais, there are many haullage companies also beginning to question if the quickest route is the best overall.

Agree the best way to get rid of the camp would be to be seen to be coming down very very hard on companies/individuals who hire illegal immigrants. The illegal labour market in the UK is rediculous. But the Tories won't tackle it as it'll be seen as "anti-business" and Labour don't have the stomach for being hard on immigrants.

Yes, Kelandry. Free from the shackles of income and infrastructure.

'illegals' . You mean asylum seeker.

Megletthesecond - someone who has not seeked asylum is not an asylum seeker. That's the whole problem, these people are not seeking asylum in France, they are currently in France illegally and attempting to end the UK illegally, whereas if they were entitled to asylum in the UK, they would also be entitled to asylum in France.

Although yes, 'illegals' is also a horrible phrase.

Seeked asylum is also a horrible phrase...

The people in the Jungle are in France and so France should be dealing with them. They are not our problem unless they land in Britain and then we should send them back as the first country they arrived in is supposed to deal with their claims. France has taken the lazy option all along and allowed the camp to grow.

Wow Kelandry. Am appalled actually.

This was not an unforeseen consequence, plenty of people pointed this out before the referendum. Just like all the other s* things that are now beginning to happen, that people are surprised at. If only people who have researched as much as they're doing now BEFORE they voted! The UK will now "be in charge of its own immigration policy" which means that they will have to pay to keep migrants out themselves. The mayor of Calais did not "let" the jungle grow, the French paid the majority for keeping the migrants coming to the UK, and fair does they don't want to do that anymore.

plymouth it is the duty of any county to process the asylum application of any refugee who applies for asylum in their country. It is not any country's responsibility to stop everyone who looks like a migrant and force them to apply for asylum in their country ( which, for obvs reasons, most countries would no want to do anyway). If the migrants prefer going to the UK to sek asylum, it is not France's responsibility to stop them from attempting to cross the channel. They id this for the UK as another EU-partner country, but now, fa chance they want to keep doing this at their expense.

Given that the UK actually contributes to security for both the tunnel and the ferries, the Mayor of Calais should be careful what she wishes for.

The Channel Tunnel would make a great terrorist target if you think about it, and given that euro tunnel is I think a French company, they wouldn't want their investment damaged. Same goes for the ferry ports, and France doesn't want another terrorist incident, given the events of the last couple of years.

The Le Touquet treaty is a bilateral treaty that also helps the French, as they get to have their border in England. If you've ever travelled by ferry or Eurostar/Eurotunnel, then you will have shown your passport to the French police before you board.

"The channel tunnel can be for our exports/people but not for return taffic if they refuse to secure our border."

...and the Mexicans are also going to build a wall on their border with the US themselves!

None of this is complete delusion!

I'm really confused If we shut the tunnel to all but outbound traffic, how are (British) people going to get back?

I use the ferry personally......

It's - fly. Higher cost.

Why should we allow France to use the channel tunnel to pour their illegal immigrants into our country? We don't have to let anyone into the country we don't want now, whole fucking point of the referendum.

Mexico is a silly example, we don't share a land border with France. We have a tunnel. We can control it.

Before the referendum, people said that a variety of things may or may not happen in the future.

Since the referendum, people have continued to say that a variety of things may or may not happen in the future.

And we still can't be certain about anything.

scaryteacher the Uk contributes, but the majority is paid by France. What has migrants got to do with terrorism?

kelandry yes, it can be "controlled" now by the UK, all the French are saying is, fine, pay for this control yourself, on your side, and do it yourself, on your side. And what's going to happen, if the French stops hindering the migrants from entering the Eurotunnel? The camp will be on British ground. Because yes, the police can stop them there, but they can't physically force them to go back into the tunnel and back to France. That takes legal processes, so the camp will be in Dover, then.

Yes Mexico, build a wall at your own expense to keep your own people in at our behest!
Oh and you French need to keep in spending money stopping people entering the Uk.

We have a tunnel. We can control it.

Only one end of it.
That end is not in France.