It's a complicated question. Muddied not only by the ghastly self-interested, rock-banging, muck-racking British press (still British even if much can blamed on The Bouncing Czech Maxwell, and the Aussie Murdoch), but also by the likes of Musket, who thinks anyone that doesn't mindlessly agree with him is Wrong.

As it stands as the moment, the vast majority of illegal migrants are from northern Africa, mostly from those states disrupted by internal strife. The Calais "problem" is seriously overdone by the UK press. I believe for two reasons. One, it's easy to stir up Little Englanders; two, it's an easy point to focus on since it is THE point of contact between the UK & Europe. The media in this country, sadly, are all about bums on seats, footfall, copy sold, call it how you will. If journalism were an athletic sport, Truth would not make the 100m Final! If you see what I mean...

The fact is that the majority of illegal immigrants do not seek entry to the UK. They never have. The rest of Europe has, over the past few decades, absorbed far more legal immigrants, asylum seekers, and illegal immigrants than the UK has. The right of centre opinion in this country will never acknowledge this, even if it actually accepts it.

There is a lot more that could be said, but I've been on Mudcat for more than a decade. What I've already said will be argued with, if not dismissed as nonsense, so I shan't waste my time. However, my personal view is this - I have no problem whatsoever with legal immigration. There are many communities who, whatever they take out (e.g. sending money back home), contribute at least as much, if not more. Many of them have been willing to die for us (& for their own cause too, be it noted). Look at the contribution of the likes of the Poles & Czechs in WWII, for example.

Illegal immigration is another matter, but I'm no more than ambivalent, because I know it is a very complicated issue. Many of them are no more than economic migrants; not refugees, not deserving of asylum. Many of them are both of the latter, desperate to the point of repeatedly risking their lives. Were I in their place I would likely do / be the same. I am lucky, because I am not in their place.

My reservation is that someone who is willing to break our laws to get in, how likely are they to follow them once they are in? How will they contribute positively? There was a case reported on the BBC as recently as a week ago. Illegal immigrant posing as a lawyer, with a history of violence. Also has, for reasons unspecified, indefinite leave to remain. Convicted, but we presumably won't chuck him out after release. Is that the sort of person anyone wants in their country?

He is, of course, not representative. One man out of thousands does not define the rest. But if you look at things rationally, you can't but wonder whether those willing to break laws to get in, who then must feel compelled to "disappear", are going to make any country a better place.