Trouble at Calais

[YCCMB]

[quote user="EuroTrash"]"It's not as if, when a bunch of illegal immigrants are intercepted, they can just say "It's fine, we're not stopping, we're off the the UK" and be waved happily on their way."

But that's pretty much what is happening isn't it. They clearly have no intention of staying and seeking asylum in France. France is not the land of milk and honey that they have their sights set on.

So they're not seeking asylum in France, and does France have the right to stop them applying for asylum in the UK if that's what they are determined to do, how does France know whether the UK will accept each person or not? And can a person be classed as immigrant in a country where they have no intention of immigrating to? Don't see how they can, really.[/quote]

A person can be classed as an illegal immigrant anywhere they've got into without documents or the necessary visas, I am pretty sure. And if they have entered that country without bothering with the small matters of legal entry and going through border controls.

As I said before, if you're an asylum seeker, you're an asylum seeker, and the rules are that you seek that asylum as soon as practicable after leaving the country you;re fleeing from. Milk and honey are irrelevant. If people are really feeling threatened in their own countries, they should be more than happy to reach a place of safety, and not expect the additional luxury of being able to cherry-pick the country they'd most like to seek asylum in. France doesn't, in fact, have the right to just let them continue on their journey to the UK, if indeed they are genuine asylum seekers. It has an obligation to process their asylum request. If they don't want to make an asylum request in France, then they're illegal immigrants. I guess even the most pig-headed member of the authorities realises that Eurocamp aren't advertising Sengatte in their Summer 2014 brochure as a 4 star site with all facilities, so they're hardly there for a bit of a summer break.

However, it seems few of these these people are genuine asylum seekers. In fact, the majority are simply illegal entrants to France, and, as such, should be dealt with as such in France. And if they have no papers and refuse to say where they're from, then maybe being detained for having broken the law will give them some time to get over their amnesia. However, if they're chatting away to one another in Amharic or Romanian or whatever, it's usually a bit of a clue that I suspect even Inspector Clouseau would be able to spot.

[EuroTrash]

Betty of course you're right, that's how it SHOULD work but as you say they are not behaving like genuine asylum seekers. France can't process asylum requests when none are made. So yes they have entered the country illegally, but immigrant, I don't know, most definitions of immigrant say an immigrant is a person who has come to live usually permanently in another country, and these lot haven't come to live in France. France has enough 'sans papiers' of its own who have come to live here and they are a totally different problem, and it doesn't deal with that one very well either.

Of course France should be chucking the Sangatte boys off of French soil and back to wherever they came from but where is the incentive, it would be worse than painting the Forth bridge, expensive and never ending. It would take impossible manpower to get on top of it. It would also get very violent and nasty which nobody wants either, these are desperate people.

I used to be a Eurocamp courier and no I wouldn't much fancy pimping the tents at Sangatte between occupants.

[YCCMB]

So, if France isn't willing to tackle the problem, I'm afraid I don't see how, by default, it becomes the UK's problem (or its cost) to resolve. I think all the arguments put forward as to why France can't (or won't) do something must be equally valid when applied to the UK - except possibly that these people want to get to the UK, but them wanting something doesn't make it so. That last argument is a bit like saying we should let ISIS in because they WANT to bomb the UK.

There seems to be a pretty strong case for a pan-EU initiative (and certainly budget) to deal with this. Although, like the CAP, I can see France engineering a substantial cut. Maybe if Italy, Spain, etc., got a bit more help to deal with the problem at source, and if some form of border control on HGV's was implemented Europe-wide together with greater policing of other entry points for an extended period, it would begin to stem the flow.

[PaulT]

I suppose, in defence of France, these illegals seem to come mainly via Italy and Spain. France for its part does not know which of these countries is involved so becomes piggy in the middle.

Then, is it really fair on Italy or Spain - there are many deserted beaches at night so quite easy to land them.

Betty perhaps your idea of a fund is a good idea.

As for the HGVs other measures could be taken, CO2 detectors, infra red detectors etc so that the illegals are detected as soon as they get in the trailers.

[idun]

In fairness to France, maybe they should police their borders better too. There are many illegals in France too.

[Gardian]

It seems to me that until you negate the cause for economic migrants to be queueing up at Calais to try to get in to the UK, then you'll never fix the problem.

The cause is quite simply that the UK is seen as a 'soft touch'.

Not so many years ago, I can remember that we employed a young man from India. HR should have been on to it sooner, but after a couple of weeks they realised that all he had was an expired student visa and unfortunately we had to terminate his employment. I wonder though whether that would happen with many employers. How easy is it to get an NHI number and thus enter the system?

Those of us who live here in France know very well how many hurdles there are to entering the French 'system'. As I recall it, the rules are supposed to be that you have to be able to demonstrate that you have the financial means to support yourself, rather than fetching up in France and potentially being a drain on the State. You'll get emergency treatment from any hospital, but that's where it ends: any further care requires a carte vitale + mutuelle / means of payment for that treatment.  As we know, there's no real mechanism for this in the UK.

So ..................... somebody from outside the EU who makes it in to the UK can 'disappear' and (presumably) sooner or later become bona fide. All very well, but what about the pressure that this puts upon the social infrastructure, i.e. healthcare, education, housing?  Rectifying this is no short term fix - it would take a radical change to the way that things are done, but it might at least 'spread the load' of economic migration.   

 

[YCCMB]

To behonest, the UK isn't nearly as soft a touch as many (prospective immigrants included) seem to imagine. And I am fairly sure that if you have no money or means of support in whatever country, none of the countries which do apply healthcare costs are actually going to refuse outright to treat you.

There's certainly an issue which crops up all the time: are people coming to the UK to milk the system, or steal our jobs? Because both can't be true. And are they coming to avail themselves of our wonderful healthcare, or do we have a failing NHS which is the laughing stock of most of the rest of Europe, if not the world? Because both of those can't be true, either.

I think the Daily Mail and its ilk must have a very wide circulation in some of these faraway countries, so it might not do any harm to suppress it. I bet that's where they're all reading about the UK as the land of milk and honey for immigrants.

[idun]

I know that things are not the soft touch imagined.

Still, there are other things in the system whereby, IMO greedy lawyers take up cases, that 'we' have to pay for, whereby the human rights act is used to excess to get 'rights' for those who should not be in the country in the first place to get better conditions whilst they are here.

I probably know too much about a couple of cases, but as things were said to me in confidence by a very very angry and upset friend, I'll not say much. My friends life has been spent helping people and now feels like the system is simply full of abuses and many lawyers rubbing their hands in glee. The costs involved enormous.

[NormanH]

Of course it would be so much nicer for everyone if these nasty people just went back to whatever hell they are trying to get out of and died of some disease, famine or war.

Anything rather than block a channel port when the Brits want to catch a ferry home after the hols...

[PaulT]

Norman

For how long have there been appeals for the starving children in Africa - remember Band Aid all those years ago. What has happened - they are still 'bashing out' kids and cannot feed them.

Aids is rife in Africa

Perhaps give condoms and not money. Still, at least they are only asking for £2 a month - listening to some radio programmes the other day from 1984 and they were asking for £11 a month to feed the starving of Africa.

Yes, there are oppressive regimes and yes, difficult to defeat.

So Norman I presume those in Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Iran, umpteen African countries, China ooh and a whole host more countries should be ushered straight in to the UK. Forgot Norman, not a problem for you as you are a permanent resident of France.

[YCCMB]

You do yourself a great disservice, Norman, in assuming that there is neither sympathy nor concern for the people trying to reach the UK from Calais. And yes, I am talking about the illegals rather than the holidaymakers.

However, unless and until someone (and I mean a government as opposed to an individual or group of individuals) develops a solution to this ongoing problem, it will continue to escalate.

I have no idea if, when or whether you have visited that area of France, or if you have any idea of the scale of the problem being faced. I am sure that you probably have no means of quantifying the proportion of genuine escapees from war, famine and terror within the group as a whole. I am sure there are many. However, the question remains: why should they continue to be allowed to reach Calais unchecked? This is not about turning them round and sending them home, but about dealing with them upon arrival on European soil.

As I've repeatedly said, if they are in such fear and desperation, and genuinely fleeing whatever terrible circumstances, I honestly fail to see why they themselves seem intent on prolonging their own suffering by spending weeks or months continuing to travel across Europe, and then extending that still further by endeavouring to cross the Channel.

Reducing the debate to some sort of playground finger-pointing is even less of a solution than any other that's been discussed or suggested, and assuming the worst in people in such an arbitrary and puerile manner doesn't really give you the moral high ground, either.

[EuroTrash]

Sorry if it seems harsh to you Norman, but groups of disaffected people just can't be given carte blanche to go wherever they like and behave however they like. There are international agreements for asylum seekers and if they follow those, they'll get fair treatment. Or if they think they can get themselves a better deal by blatantly ignoring the law, they have to be prepared to take the consequences. Their choice.

You can say the asylum procedures are too slow and not fit for purpose but it's the best that the civilised world has managed to come up with so far.

Every country's first responsibility is to protect its own citizens and its own society. The fact that some countries don't do that doesn't mean that the rest should stop doing it as well.

It's a parallel argument to kids from disadvantaged backgrounds and how far society should bend over backwards to accommodate them. It needs to be tough love not kid gloves, because condoning anti-social behaviour on a domestic or an international scale is going to create more problems, not solve any.

[NormanH]

The document I linked to in my first post says:

States have a right to decide whether to grant foreigners access to their territory, but must respect EU law, the ECHR and applicable human rights guarantees

EU law establishes common rules for EU Member States regarding the issuance of short-term visas

EU law contains safeguards relating to the implementation of border control ( and border surveillance activities, particularly at sea )

EU law, particularly the Schengencquis enables individuals to travel free from border controls within the agreed area

Under EU law, an entry ban against an individual by a single state of the Schengenarea can deny that individual access to the entire Schengen area

The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights provides for the right to asylum and for the prohibition of refoulement

The EU asylumacquis applies from the moment an individual has arrived at an EU border

In certain circumstances, the ECHR imposes limitations on the right of a state to detain or turn away a migrant at its border , regardless of whether the migrant is in a transit zone orotherwise within that state’s jurisdiction. The state may also be required to provide remedy whereby the alleged violation of the ECHR can be put before a National authority

Calais is a focus which is very visible because of UK media attention, but there are aother entry points to Europe

http://www.economist.com/node/21549012

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13766454

[YCCMB]

[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28948663[/url]

Yesterday on Radio 4

[EuroTrash]

You missed this one out Norman

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:348:0098:0107:EN:PDF

[YCCMB]

[quote user="NormanH"]The document I linked to in my first post says:

States have a right to decide whether to grant foreigners access to their territory, but must respect EU law, the ECHR and applicable human rights guarantees But this also assumes that the foreigners arrive through normal, legal channels.

EU law establishes common rules for EU Member States regarding the issuance of short-term visas And this assumes they apply for a visa, and have travel documents

EU law contains safeguards relating to the implementation of border control ( and border surveillance activities, particularly at sea )

EU law, particularly the Schengencquis enables individuals to travel free from border controls within the agreed area

Under EU law, an entry ban against an individual by a single state of the Schengenarea can deny that individual access to the entire Schengen area However, non-EU nationals wishing to enter the Schengen area require a visa. Border controls are present at entrances to the Schengen area, and passports/visa checks are made to ensure that non-EU nationals are in possession of a Schengen visa.

The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights provides for the right to asylum and for the prohibition of refoulement And nobody has said it doesn't, but the law is also clear on the issue of claiming asylum upon arrival outside the country of origin. (As per your own point below)

The EU asylumacquis applies from the moment an individual has arrived at an EU border

In certain circumstances, the ECHR imposes limitations on the right of a state to detain or turn away a migrant at its border , regardless of whether the migrant is in a transit zone orotherwise within that state’s jurisdiction. The state may also be required to provide remedy whereby the alleged violation of the ECHR can be put before a National authority

I think your document also mentions that applications for asylum can be damaged, if not invalidated, by failure to make that demand upon arrival in the EU, and also by failure to produce identification or documents.

Calais is a focus which is very visible because of UK media attention, but there are aother entry points to Europe

http://www.economist.com/node/21549012

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13766454

[/quote]

[nomoss]

If Scotland becomes independent, conditions will apparently be so much better that illegal immigrants will probably head for there [:)]

[NickP]

[quote user="nomoss"]If Scotland becomes independent, conditions will apparently be so much better that illegal immigrants will probably head for there [:)]

[/quote]

Absolutely and maybe they can help them with their debts[:D]

[Pierre ZFP]

With Eurostar and the High Speed link they could be in Scotland in just a few hours [6]

 

[Chancer]

It was not reported on the news that day, dont know about the papers, did you ever find out what was happening Pierre or was it just another day in frontierland?

[mint]

[quote user="nomoss"]If Scotland becomes independent, conditions will apparently be so much better that illegal immigrants will probably head for there [:)]

[/quote]

Except they'll have a job understanding the natives [:D]

I know I do.  I once met a gentleman from Falkirk but, as I couldn't understand what he was saying, that acquaintance never became er.............meaningful[:D]

[Pierre ZFP]

No, never found out if it was anything other than another day in frontierland as you put it.

As was said above, maybe just advantage being taken of a backlog of stopped traffic.  It did look very volitile with much shouting and gesturing, trucks being broken in to and I think the wrong word or action and a full scale riot would break out.

I saw exclusively young black men of perhaps late teen, early twenties.  No women/girls/children/older people, not even the East European lot that used to be there, but I have never seen so many before

[NormanH]

From Eritrea and Sudan according to impeccable sources[6]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2713761/From-Eritrea-Sudan-new-migrant-queue-Calais-Latest-illegal-encampment-spring-hundreds-currently-waiting-chance-escape.html

[Chancer]

Watch the video on Normans link.

Looks exactly like the disturbance that you witnessed.

How much does the driver risk to lose if he didnt find them in the next 5 minutes?

[NormanH]

[quote user="PaulT"]Norman

For how long have there been appeals for the starving children in Africa - remember Band Aid all those years ago. What has happened - they are still 'bashing out' kids and cannot feed them.

Aids is rife in Africa

Perhaps give condoms and not money. Still, at least they are only asking for £2 a month - listening to some radio programmes the other day from 1984 and they were asking for £11 a month to feed the starving of Africa.

Yes, there are oppressive regimes and yes, difficult to defeat.

So Norman I presume those in Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Iran, umpteen African countries, China ooh and a whole host more countries should be ushered straight in to the UK. Forgot Norman, not a problem for you as you are a permanent resident of France.[/quote]

Did you also forget that Calais is in France, so  we already have the 'problem'...?