BS: Problems at Calais. Why?

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: Greg F.
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 09:51 AM

What about number per cubic metres of breathable air?

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 09:44 AM

The UK is not bottom of the list either by numbers accepted, or by numbers per head of population. Neither are we anywhere the top.

We would rate highly in numbers per metre of undeveloped land, and would be unbeatable in numbers per available house.

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 09:43 AM

Odd thing you said about me Raedwolf?

Try reading my fucking posts before displaying your gormless ignorance for a change.

Anybody who disagrees with he has a view. I have a view. They have a view.

What you should be asking is whether they borrowed a view.

Prat.

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: Raedwulf
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 09:36 AM

"Rest of Europe" was perhaps a bit generic, Ake. But Germany has been absorbing more immigrants, of one sort or another, than the UK for years. So have the Scand's. English may be THE international language, but an awful lot of African countries (which is where the bulk of the migrants have been coming from for a long time) have French as a first or second language.

So why would they want to come here? Very many of them don't. As Musket suggested, the UK may still have a reputation for fair play, civilised compassionate citizens and statesman like government. But that doesn't necessarily make us the preferred destination, especially when the English Channel remains a hindrance!

I'm not about to go hunting for specific figures. However, I've seen enough reports over the years that have included them. The UK is not bottom of the list either by numbers accepted, or by numbers per head of population. Neither are we anywhere the top. Which is not the impression I am left with from what comes out of most of the UK media.

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:18 PM

Good post for an Englishman Raedwulf, only one slight quibble, why did you contrast UK immigration rates with the WHOLE of Europe?
Or did you mean each individual country in Europe? :0(

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: Raedwulf
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 09:40 AM

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.

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 09:26 AM

Where will they live?
From another Guardian piece,
"If there is one thing that revolutionary communists and bankers can agree on, it is that there is a housing crisis in Britain. There are too few homes, usually costing too much, often in the wrong places, and often of poor quality. The crisis damages lives, breaks up families, blights employment prospects, reduces mobility and slows the economy."

"The housing crisis is an accelerating human disaster. It is creating exploitative landlords, overcrowding and poor-quality homes. Private renters spend 40% of their income on housing. It is shocking that many people in their 20s now regard it as an accepted fact that they will never have much by way of a home."

"The most obvious cause of Britain's housing is the simple operation of supply and demand. The country's population is increasing, and we like to live in smaller units than in the past. A figure of about 240,000 is consistently estimated as the amount of new homes Britain needs each year, and with equal consistency it is never achieved. In 2014, fewer than 120,000 were built."
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/mar/14/britain-housing-crisis-10-ways-solve-rowan-moore-general-election

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 08:43 AM

This puts a little perspective on the issue of asylum-seekers, and the perceived situation in Calais (and perhaps elsewhere?).

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 07:34 AM

I think it is because many of the economic migrants have English as a second language, far fewer French or Italian. Of course some have German, but then far more of the migrants go to Germany anyway.

Its also because Osbourne's lie that the UK economy is on the up compared with France has gained some traction.

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: GUEST,20 Aug 15 - 04:44 PM
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:24 AM

Yes Kampervan, it was me who said on the previous discussion that they were probably very resourceful people. However, so are the ones who get a training (as a nurse maybe) and then take the legal route to the UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: GUEST,Kampervan
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:05 AM

A fair point Guest. I have no idea as to how many of them finance their trip or how many are truly fleeing persecution or how many just fancy life in a western country.

Nor am I sure whether it really matters. If someone wants to get into a country that badly,then maybe they would make a great contribution towards that country when they got in.

I'm not stating my beliefs here, because I don't know what to believe. I just get the feeling that Musket is right and we should get a lot more facts before making judgements.

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: GUEST,20 Aug 15 - 04:44 PM
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 03:39 AM

I made the suggestion that they may be were mainly economic migrants because the OP seemed to assume that they were all refugees.

If they have been able to afford to get to Calais they are not the ones suffering most in the "apalling conditions in their home countries".

Don't just think of the Eritrean who could find the dollars to get to Calais. Think one the one who is stuck at home as child conscript or the child with no money who ran the risk of being shot crossing the border to a camp in Ethiopia before they reached the age for conscription and is stuck there pennyless.

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 21 Aug 15 - 02:36 AM

Thinking on, the idea of becoming an EU citizen at first port of entry then just coming here as an EU citizen?

Actually, I reckon that's a good point although I do think residency visas rather than citizenship are what tend to be offered. I have a friend, a doctor colleague, who holidays in Switzerland with his family as his work visa (he is Iraqi) precludes travel into other EU countries. Granted, he isn't a refugee by status although as a Christian he was persecuted in many ways under Saddam.

But like Reginald D Hunter, Clive James, Boris Johnson, Nick Cave and anybody resident in The UK who was born elsewhere, he is I suppose an economic migrant. One of my fellow Muskets has a "green card" right of residency in The USA. If he ever took it up, he too would be an economic migrant.

I come from a village near Barnsley but live in London due to my job. I am an economic migrant for that matter.

It's about time dangerous rhetoric was put in its place, people traffickers taken off the streets and rues, politicians looked at the issues not the grandstanding and the media stick to checking out cellulite on celebrities.

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 06:34 PM

Whilst you wouldn't believe it listening to the rabid dogs and their apologists, The UK has a reputation for fair play, civilised compassionate citizens and statesman like government.

Not that the savage media and their ministerial poodles care about such things..

Perhaps another factor is that the second language of most of these people is English, so a head start in society from their perspective.

All I know is that the first "guest" on this thread has problems thinking beyond their own insignificant country, far away and neither relevant nor important to this debate. No matter, should they ever become important, they'll turn up late again, just in time to claim the credit eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 04:44 PM

How many of them are economic migrants who would not qualify for refugee status or asylum? Think of the ones who could not afford to get to Calais.

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: Greg F.
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 03:35 PM

Sorry, Kamper - the troglodites are coming out of the woodwork, bearing rocks, as per ususal.

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: GUEST,Kampervan
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 03:29 PM

I thought that it might be a waste of time asking a serious question and hoping for an informative answer, but I tried.

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 02:46 PM

Err.. Keep banging the rocks together..

Good job the Atlantic is bigger than the channel.

Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 02:41 PM

Englanders are more likely to hire undocumented workers.

Englanders may pay sub-standard wages, however it is far more than hopeless.

Englanders like the luxery of a servant class.

Englanders homes were designed with servant quarters in mind.

Englanders are most likely to have beer sotted bobbys.


'......................

OR

Calis is a media joke...perpetuated by media moguls in America...to take the focus of the media hype off the presidential front runner Trump and "the Trump Wall" streching from Vancouver Canada to Nova Scotia with his name emblazoned in gold-leaf every 400 meters.

.............

OR

It really, REALLY, sux to be a black, living with other blacks.

OR

.................

Anchor babies work in more than California.

..................

OR

Most people can not instictively swim so a land crossing is easier.

Subject: BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
From: GUEST,Kampervan
Date: 20 Aug 15 - 01:25 PM

OK, I'm starting this thread because I want to understand what is happening at Calais.

I understand that thousands of people have sought refuge in Europe because of persecution, war and the appalling conditions in their home countries. The fact that they put themselves and their families into personal danger surely demonstrates how strong is their need to find refuge.

But what I don't understand is why, having reached the 'relative' safety of Europe, so many of them make their way to Calais and put their lives at risk again trying to get to the UK.


Now I believe that the UK is morally obliged to help re-settle our fair share of the refugees who arrive in Europe, but why the almost suicidal drive on the part of some refugees to get across the channel?
As I understand it, if someone is granted refugee status in any European country and then subsequently acquires citizenship, they can legitimately move the UK whenever they like.

As I say, I believe that all civilised countries should help re-settle refugees, we have a history of doing this in the UK and long may it continue. Why can't it all be managed without the need for 'The Jungle' and for all the unpleasantness that accompanies it?

Can anyone enlighten me?