Can we discuss the migrant crisis in a sensible and humane way?

Is there proof that many are destroying "their papers" ?
Surely papers are lost in wars .passports destroyed in bombings etc.
Lack of photographic ID doesn't invalidate someone or their need for help .

I'm still pondering. There are absolutely no easy answers. However, just thinking of the boatload that arrived in Devon yesterday and were quickly picked up by two people carriers. What would happen to them? They're not legally here so won't have the necessary papers etc to claim, well, anything. If they're given fake papers that is a crime but, worse, if not, then they're really prisoners of the traffickers. Potentially, slave labour with no rights or escape possibility or if female even worse. As I said, I was just trying to think through the possibilities for that boatload.

Agreed Aveline, this episode in Devon is another reason why immigration has to be handled officially, swiftly and efficiently. Those poor souls and others like them have no recourse to state help, are likely to be enslaved or worse by people who are as evil as the people traffickers.

paddyann54

Is there proof that many are destroying "their papers" ?
Surely papers are lost in wars .passports destroyed in bombings etc.
Lack of photographic ID doesn't invalidate someone or their need for help .

Eritreans aren't issued with passports except in exceptional circumstances. They don't have a choice.

16:18Aveline

They could be terrorists regrouping to plan an attack, the problem is no one knows they have just disappeared.

16:27HousePlantQueen

You don't know the ones in Devon who arrived by speed boat and were met by 2 cars are poor souls or are you that naive, they could be criminals terrorists murderers or rapists the point is we don't know who they are.

That's true Maudi. Another unpleasant possiblity. Oh dear.

They are just as likely to be doctors, engineers, teachers, driven from their countries by persecution for belonging to the wrong religion or supporting the wrong political party
The point is we don'y know who they are

I am really interested in why people always look on the downside.

They could be a boatload of terrorists, or they could be desperate people looking for safety in a so-called civilised, democratic country that doesn't allow them any legal method of entry.

Given the balance of probabilities, I'm going to go with the second. I think that people go with the first because they are really bad at risk assessment, are scared, have no idea of the world outside their comfy living room and and permanently outraged that anyone could be getting something they don't believe they are entitled to.

Kandinsky
^ If you’re in an area where migrants are having a negative impact on your life ( school places, housing, hospital waiting lists etc etc ) then you’ll say ‘stop! Enough! ‘ - & it’s usually the areas where there’s already social problems that migrants are settled.^
That’s a pretty accurate description, but doesn’t necessarily mean they don’t want a proper solution to the issue. Dealing with asylum seekers quickly and efficiently would be an amazing advance. Many of those coming are well qualified in their own countries. I’m not sure it would Stilton the smugglers, and I don’t know how to deal with that, except by tackling them at source as has been mentioned.

We just don't know the balance of probabilities. Who knows who the Devon boatload were? Whoever they are they are at an immediate disadvantage as they have not gone through the proper channels. They will potentially be permanent outsiders without official papers. That's not a recipe for a positive outcome.

Katie59 The problem is the “African mindset” it was no until this year that it was explained.

In any country the President is the “chief” everything belongs to the chief, so corruption is not seen as a problem by the population in general. Secondly population control is a taboo issue, it is never discussed, education of women may control population, politics certainly will not.

Good heavens, what a lot of tosh. When was the book you got it from published? 1935?

Africa is an enormous country encompassing a huge range of people with different ethnic origins, cultures and religions, from countries like Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt to Namibia and South Africa, mali Ethiopia - and with different birthrates.

yes Africa still has the highest birthrates in the world, but you have only to look at the patch work of colours on the world in the link to realise how diverse the problem in Africa is.

What the country needs more than anything is sustained and efficient econolmic development and, yes, that includes the education of women. As for corruption. I have yet to speak to any African who condones corruption or does not see it as a problem, but most people impoverished and malnourished feel they have no way of safely objecting to the behaviour of their leaders.

Aveline

We just don't know the balance of probabilities. Who knows who the Devon boatload were? Whoever they are they are at an immediate disadvantage as they have not gone through the proper channels. They will potentially be permanent outsiders without official papers. That's not a recipe for a positive outcome.

I'm not disagreeing with that Aveline, but then its quite a leap to They could be terrorists here to do us harm. We do know the balance of probabilities. How many people have arrived on these shores and turned out to be terrorists? And how many have arrived and turned out not to be?

I'm not saying that we should ignore every risk, we have to consider everything, but we can't go through life thinking everybody is out to get us.

M0nica

Katie59 The problem is the “African mindset” it was no until this year that it was explained.

In any country the President is the “chief” everything belongs to the chief, so corruption is not seen as a problem by the population in general. Secondly population control is a taboo issue, it is never discussed, education of women may control population, politics certainly will not.

Good heavens, what a lot of tosh. When was the book you got it from published? 1935?

Africa is an enormous country encompassing a huge range of people with different ethnic origins, cultures and religions, from countries like Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt to Namibia and South Africa, mali Ethiopia - and with different birthrates.

yes Africa still has the highest birthrates in the world, but you have only to look at the patch work of colours on the world in the link to realise how diverse the problem in Africa is.

What the country needs more than anything is sustained and efficient econolmic development and, yes, that includes the education of women. As for corruption. I have yet to speak to any African who condones corruption or does not see it as a problem, but most people impoverished and malnourished feel they have no way of safely objecting to the behaviour of their leaders.

Actually it was a direct explanation of the situation today in most of Southern Africa.
Why population control is taboo and not discussed.
Why corruption is not a big issue in those countries.
The 5 countries I have travelled in are open to tourists, there are many others in West and Sub Saharan Africa that are not, and are much worse.

The respective governments have got anti corruption laws to impress the west, which are completely ignored especially by the ruling elite and the police. Ironically corruption was much less in 1935 when colonial governments were in power, now the mineral wealth is being exploited by China, the Elite cream off most of the wealth, no questions asked, second in line is the army to keep order.

If anything it’s getting worse because expat managers, technicians and aid workers are being replaced by citizens as an example South African Airways closed down but the Government because corruption and nepotism made it impossible to manage, so many were paid for doing nothing.

What is the difference between the corruption in some African countries and the oppressive behaviour by the police and exactly the same thing happening in Russia Beloruss, India and China and a number of other countries?

They are all restrictive in different ways, before Ukraine hostilities China was worst of all if you speak out against the government you have problems.
Yet we trade freely with them, moreover, the way they exploit developing countries with no regard for conditions there and fuel corruption, in addition to that Chinese owned shops are driving local businesses out.

Employers in the UK are desperate to recruit staff. 1.3m vacancies. The asylum seekers are mostly able bodied young men who want work and are often fairly well educated. Why send them to Rwanda when they can be of use here, working, being trained and paying taxes? Johnson is simply playing a divisive electoral game but then he lives in an ethics-free zone. More cooperation with the EU would be of mutual benefit but he's scared of the DUP and his far right MPs who now have him in a corner.

Most of those crossing the channel are young men. If they are fleeing from war-torn countries, why are they leaving their womenfolk behind to deal with the chaos?

well said Grantanow.
It is all driven politically . Johnson is scared of losing his red wall seats. He will not negotiate with the French, his way of saying "look I've done Brexit , I'm not going to have anything to do with these nasty Europeans." Political .
Hence no cooperation to set up centres to process the refugees in Calais. If there were legal routes there would be no need for people smugglers.

My thoughts too libra, able bodied young men should not be leaving war torn countries and leaving the women folk to protect themselves and their children.

libra10

Most of those crossing the channel are young men. If they are fleeing from war-torn countries, why are they leaving their womenfolk behind to deal with the chaos?

Right, first off, your first sentence is wrong. But anyway.

Did anybody watch WDYTYA last night?

Matt Lucas's family tried to get out of Germany in the thirties. Germany wasn't "war torn" in the thirties. They had a government that were doing things for "the people".

Within 10 years, 10 out of 11 of his ancestors were dead in Nazi Gas Chambers. His GM made it to the UK, leaving her beloved mother behind, but never got to complete her training as a doctor.

Never again, we said, but we've lost our humanity.

And can we avoidp saying "women folk"? It makes it sound like a middle European fairy tale.

The problem is exacerbated by the lack of infrastructure. How can we house thousands of refugees in decent and affordable homes when there is a crisis in social housing and the poorest have to tolerate uninhabitable properties? When we wait upwards of 5 weeks for a GP appointment how can we offer decent healthcare to additional individuals and families? Schools are so radically underfunded, that ESL support is not adequate. Many refugee children are severely traumatised yet our child mental health services are overwhelmed by existing needs. I’m sure there is an image in refugees minds that all will be well if they reach Britain, but the reality is quite different, and why should they want to come to our overcrowded little Island when they are already in a safe country - France?

libra10

Most of those crossing the channel are young men. If they are fleeing from war-torn countries, why are they leaving their womenfolk behind to deal with the chaos?

Agree entirely.

.