I have discovered an advantage of Brexit

Look at Afghanistan now the troops have gone! But that’s not why they were there in the first place.

GillT57
I think that's a false dichotomy

25Avalon, GillT57 is right, I did say that economic development in their home countries was needed, but I also said good governance was needed.

Strange though it may seem, I do not necessarily think Foreign Aid is much help. Foreign aid is essential for specific projects and is vital in emrgencies and crisis. But what these countries need, first and foremost is good governance - and a lack of corruption. One of the reasons our intervention in Afghanistan was a failure was, while we did a lot to enable female emancipation, we did nothing to deal with the endemic extensive and massive corruption in the country.

The route to good governance and economic progress in these countries lies in these countries and with the people of these countries themselves. In almost all the countries these immigrants come from, the governments are in the hands of competing groups of people prepared to fight to get their hands on the levers of power - and the money it enables them to get their hands on. As first one group then another compete for power, those replaced, if they are not killed, and they rarely are now, retreats to a comfortable retirement in some Middle East country or the USA or some other foreign capital, there to live in palatial grandeur on the money they have filtered away during their leadership years.

Kill corruption and you will get stable government. get stable government and you will get economic growth. I have come to the conclusion that, if anything, Foreign Aid makes corruption worse.

Totally agree with your very eloquent post M0nica

The U.K. has been dropped from being Germany’s main suppliers. This represents a loss of £13.8bn over 6 months. That is just one country, it won’t be long before others find different suppliers as well because of the irritating and difficult customs rules.

U.K. has dropped the climate change goals in the proposed trade deal with Australia- because the Australian prime minister refused to include them. Great - just shows how desperate we are.

M0nica you are just wrong to say:
"Many of the immigrants at Calais, not all, I know that, have no solid ground for refugee status"

Do you remember the Calais clearance in 2016? The one and only time we knew for sure if the people camped there are "genuine" refugees or not. I remember it well. 7400 people were removed and everyone was officially processed including full checks. It was in 2016 and it was the only time we got to see exactly who these people were who were trying to cross the channel.

At last reading, I remember just under 90% were granted refugee status after full investigation.
So, I realise that out of 7400 people in Calais, roughly 740 were not deemed to be "genuine" but I hardly think this is the many of which you speak. Most clearly did have solid grounds for refugee status.

I was quoting something said, I think, on the radio. I judged the source to be reliable.

Thinking empirically, I would think that if I was an immigrant anywhere trying to get to a particular country with no reason for seeking assylum other than economic reasons, I would avoid all contact with authorities and if a round up like that at Calais was taking place, I would melt away and go somewhere else.

We regularly travel on the Portsmouth - Caen ferry and when the Calais round up was taking place, all of a sudden we had a large influx of immigrants camping and trying to get on lorries and the ferry at Caen. I think the same thing happened at other ports like Le Havre and even St Malo.

Up to then we had not seen immigrants at Caen, the ferries are not that frequent so the number of lorries is fewer and almost without exception have come long distances without stopping and drive straight into the port, which is small, compact and heavily protected and patrolled.

The fact that few of those processed at Calais did not have an entitlement to come to the UK is not a guide to the number in that position. If you know you will not be accepted, why draw the authorities attention to yourself?

Good grief.

I was reading about the witch trials in Scotland the other day. Basically, once they decided you were a witch, the system was set up to prove you were a witch, because it didn't matter if you were or not, they had already decided.

They'd make stuff up about you. Evidence could be presented as fact when it didn't actually prove anything.

See where I'm going with this?

Monica do you really think that refugees are going to attempt the crossing from Caen or the other Normandy ports? The reason they all congregate at Calais is because it's the shortest crossing.

Dinahmo over the last five years or so there have been quite a lot of migrants gathering in Ouistreham. We live near there and it was quite normal to see groups gathering in various bits of the town and rough camping where they could. I was also on a crossing as a foot passenger when a young man was injured falling from a car. They have mostly disappeared since Covid, but it was a significant problem for such a small town. There was a lot of charitable support from the inhabitants as well as concern.

Dinahmo They did and I saw them because I use that route regularly. If you read my post you will see that I make it clear that I was describing what I was seeing happening when there was the crackdown at Calais. It was also discussed extensively in all our local papers in France. Some came to Cherbourg as well.

Those who know the basis of their asylum claims was shaky simply moved to other ports out of the way of the police and authorities

Ah, Mamie corroboration, thank you. I am glad local people helped them. I felt so sorry for them. They were so young.

Well I believe that you saw what you saw, obviously M0nica but if the number of "jungle" residents was believed to be at peak around 10,000 then that means 1,600 believed they were going to be rejected. Add to that (lets be conservativehere, say) 15% of the 7,400 we know about (1,110) and we have 2710 rejected out of the 10,000 - 27%

It's obviously not a small number but it does mean that 73% are likely to be genuine.

NotSpaghetti the composition of immigrants at Calais is, and has always been a changing mix, nor do we know how many people moved away from Calais or delayed moving there when the registration campaign started because they knew they would be rejected. So it is quite impossible to assess what proportion of the immigrants are economic immigrants. We only have a snapshot of a self selected sample on one given date and do not know whether this sample was typical or not.

Refugees are meant to seek refuge in the first safe country they came to. The majority have come through many countries to reach France. Once we make it possible for almost everyone to get into Britain, all other countries on their route will do is facilitate their transit through their countries to ours.

I do not know what the solution is, I wish I did, but every solution proposed so far has failed. The worst one is the one now proposed by Priti Patel, of turning boats back.

Refugees are meant to seek refuge in the first safe country they came to."

No, that's a myth.

Alegrias1

^Refugees are meant to seek refuge in the first safe country they came to."^

No, that's a myth.

Indeed. I think this myth arose from the Dublin agreement where asylum seekers entering the EU had to register their claim in the first EU country they entered and then the decision of that country was automatically adopted in all EU countries.

Which would then allow them to seek work in any EU country.

Alegrias1

^Refugees are meant to seek refuge in the first safe country they came to."^

No, that's a myth.

This does seem to be a Europe wide problem. So maybe it would be good if all the countries joined together in some sort of union and sorted out the problem together instead of each one trying to push the problems onto someone else

Gosh that's a good idea Jackiest. It'll never catch on though

Many of the countries of Europe take many more refugees than the number who try to get into Britain.
I am in contact with a woman who has been going regularly to the camps at Calais and Dunkirk. From her experience it would seem the great majority are genuine refugees some of whom not only have good qualifications but were also working before they needed to flee.
We travelled through Ouistreham at the beginning of the month and it was noticeable how there were many fewer Africans around the port etc than there had been on our last journey in 2019. There was also a manned police vehicle all the time sitting in the big car park just before the port itself.
The only aggression we encountered was from a somewhat angry Frenchman gesticulating for us to leave the line of cars travelling to the lines waiting to board - we had to stop , get out and open the boot - he then removed a hold-all and put it in a scanner and then flung it back! Nothing to do with being Brits as we were in a French registered car!

Every European country is dealing with refugees .English is so well taught throughout the world ,it's a no brainer really

It’s interesting to witness how some politicians change their views when they want power.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/16/michel-barnier-marine-le-pen-france-presidential-candidate

MerylStreep

It’s interesting to witness how some politicians change their views when they want power.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/16/michel-barnier-marine-le-pen-france-presidential-candidate

I am not defending Barrier's point of view, in fact I think it's morally wrong and mean-spirited. But this is actually a reflection of the EU policy which allows free movement within (well technically and importantly, the freedom to seek employment) and has hardened considerably to movement inwards from outside the EU. So there's no actual evidence he has changed his mind.