Were you offended?

They are working. Some of them.
Not all of the jobs could have gone to British workers because presumably some of the businesses would not exist with I presume cheaper labour.

Go on www.fullfact.org, soon.
You will find most of your questions answered there.

And also of course, a larger population means more jobs for others.

Which part? I am not reading all that lot!

dj, I did not say you were splitting hairs; you seemed to think I was saying that. It is splitting hairs to say asylum seekers do not receive benefits. They clearly do. The ordinariness of the benefits they receive is neither here nor there in the minds of the people who think asylum seekers come here for benefits.

I wasn't patronising either.

Just the immigration bits, soon. It's full of interesting facts.

Right, I understand now, bags. Full Fact is about splitting hairs, and seeing the most important parts. Too many people get their information about migrants/refugees/asylum seekers from media that only see part of the story.

The reason they need some money to live on when they claim asylum is because until they are given refugee status, they are not allowed to look for work. If they are not given something to live on, they will go into the black economy. Immigrants of whatever status coming here are in a no-win situation, being criticised for claiming asylum, taking our jobs, being on benefits, taking our houses.
Yet, as said earlier, and by Nick Cohen, if you were in their situation, you would want to come here.

The new series of Who do you Think You Are? starts this month. In it are people whose families came here because of persecution, or people who emigrated because of persecution. One of the themes seems to be about escaping and coming here to find refuge. I wonder how many people will not see the significance.

Too much for me to read.

I dont mind reading a fraction of it, if you want to point me to something specific.

No wonder your knowledge is so sketchy if you can't be bothered to read a couple of articles, soontobe.

x post

Ana.
Have you seen the link? There are 100's of links on there about immigration!

Treat it as a challenge, soon. Just read the headings, to see what you are interested in.

Well perhaps not 100's. But there were so many, I gave up counting. 100?

Not at all. We should be talking about the issue not just a "word". Stick to what really matters.

Soontobe. "A larger population means more jobs for others"
Perhaps you would care to expand on that. You have obviously read a great deal on this subject.

I am quite awareJen that these would be immigrants are supposed to seek the asylum where they land in Europe but we do have to work with the fact that the two most involved countries at the moment - Italy and Greece- are allowing them through and Italy is giving them some form of permit. So we might as well go with the flow and get them done when they reach our borders- which in Europe is Calais - the border controls are there before you board the train or ferry.

Strange that Calais has now become our border. The Tudors would have agreed. Fisheries do not, however.

That would be the Le Touquet treaty. Something to do with Sangette.

Good last two posts Bez. The migrants trying to get here from Calais are already in the EU, they have no reason to be stuck in camps, they could accept the French way of life if they are accepted.Whatever the reason to get here ( we could be more accommodating than the French, probably are) they should stay in the first EU country they arrive in.As a country we take quite a large percentage as Anya has shown already, and there are an estimated 10,000 failed asylum seekers still here and getting £36 each weekly, not a lot, but add it up?That Is just an estimate of failed asylum seekers, there may be more living here with friends and not claiming any benefit.The EU has to have a plan, I know they thought they had , as in ' the first country entered would investigate their claims and aims' but this is no longer working properly.

You go through French Border agency and Passport Control at Dover- so it is reciprocal and has been in operation for a number of years and the migrants have been on the motorway between Boulogne and Calais for some time - so has the problem of them trying to get into the lorries in broad daylight - we witnessed it while in the traffic trying to enter the port about a year ago - the French had lots of extra Gendarmes and also CRS police come to the scene then.

Is it still British law that anyone transporting foreign persons without proper documentation into the UK, however unwittingly, is heavily fined?

I think that rule is hard on the drivers when you see what is happening at Calais and maybe should be changed - I saw a report last week where a lorry driver who had reason to believe he had stowaways told the authorities in UK - two people were found hidden but he was still fined! That is hardly conducive to getting the co-operation of the drivers who have suspicions.

www.welfareweekly.com/concerns-raised-over-plan-to-strip-failed-asylum-seeker-families-of-benefits/

soon I love/hate it when my posts get deleted and I can't for the life of me remember what I said!

I am offended by this.

theconversation.com/is-this-really-europe-refugees-in-calais-speak-of-desperate-conditions-45414

Are we civilised if we let people live like this?