Is there a solution to the 'Calais Situation'?

General Discussion
41

Brain, its a lucrative buzz in the NATO "liberated" Libya and soon will become a buzz of Turkish touts. In Erbil I was surprised how many young guys openly said "well, its 10.000 USD to the Greek shores, then I go to Germany and marry"... Every Expat in the field, working for IOM, UNHCR & OCHA, knows this, so do the trafficker who are not stopped by their respective governments because of bribes. In 2003/07 over 2 Million Iraqis were cleansed out of Iraq fleeing to Syria, 2006/07 over 2. Million where cleansed out of Dafur, fleeing to Chad, by radical Islamic Janjaweed and Beshir is running free despite arrest warrant of ICC. He can do so because important western governments refuse to sign up with ICC.

Billions of dollars are pumped through relief agencies to contain problems in countries of unbelievable wealth. Oil is the reason governments are undercutting efforts to enact legislation toward ending this development of ethnic cleansing. This kind of policy - crafted by neo-cons and the oil companies - does not reduce our growing dependence on foreign oil. The obvious consequence is that there will be many more of such wars. At some level, we know all of this - we know our lifestyle is unsustainable; we know we are gassing up our SUVs with human lives. So it is a silence of complicity.

42

What has being a so-called wealth creator to do with that and as for understanding where money comes from for anything, I have probably a far profounder knowledge than most people who have been generators of money for business. Whoever has worked with a foot in economics and labour needs to know and whilst that was focused on children and youth, I also had several directorships and trusteeships which in each case were fundraising oriented. Whoever is involved with fundraising across governmental, private finance and public donation domains learns a lot more about money and using it to the accounted penny than you may imagine. I have the very opposite to a blind spot, indeed have had to learn about budgeting what is often non-replaceable funding as one of a group bearing that responsibility. I did just over 30 years of that and am proud to have done so, also thoroughly enjoyed the responsibility I took on that taught me a great deal more than I would have know otherwise. Never make assumptions about people.

Brockway, one of the group of founders of War on Want, founding member of CND, campaigned for the end of all colonies and from the late 1950s on he several times proposed legislation to end racial discrimination that was voted down in parliament each time. It took until the Race Relations Act 1965 followed by he 1968 Act beyond Brockway's time in the Commons for the legislation on discrimination to finally end the way things were, except that in reality it has continued to this day. However, the 1962 Commonwealth Immigrants Act had also slowed the numbers down as the UK was gripped with massive unemployment problems.

None of that period actually compares with today except for two points. One is that regardless of political cover ups, there is vast unemployment. Economic migrants are being used because they are cheaper labour than people who would have to be paid minimum hourly rates/wages and have a wide range of workplace protections. Immigrants invariably pay far higher rents than people who can take advantage of tenant protections. Just think what is going on behind the façades of press outrage, public opinion against immigrants and all the rest of it that those who profit do not want seen. I know very well that in the 1960s and 70s, certainly the UK had well over 70% against all immigration. My then wife had to justify having married a UK citizen and explaining why she, and by implication we, should not live in France. The questionnaire she had to fill out was exhaustive. In France, if I remember, they were still reacting negatively to the loss of North African and south east Asian colonies and wanted none of them here so that between policy and public opinion it was comparable with the UK.

We are actually seeing a variant on what happened in the immediate aftermath of WW2 and the end of colonialism as it had been. Many of the people heading to Europe start out knowing that their grandparents, occasionally parents, had some kind of foot in the empires of the British and French, although some of the countries they are now heading for are far more arbitrary destinations. Many become legal migrants too, although initially their status was not except that they were never illegals themselves, often it was the acts by traffickers who took them across borders that were.

43

It is a very difficult situation....yes and.many of us travel across, towards and seek

a change but someone, somehow has to be responsible for the financial and negativite

factors relating to an over populated country.

May I add that here in France we are responsible for ourselves in so many ways.

We do not get free medical assistance or homes and we have to earn our daily bread.

The people coming across from Calais without legal entry are at the mercy of

the British people and their generosity.

Think about that please.

44

Just read the very first paragraph on here....

Yes it is a British problem....AND needs to be addressed by UK....

these people at Calais are desperate to arrive at the golden city streets.

45

I suggest you might like to look up a certain Fenner Brockway in your book of 'facts' Brian. He introduced this law if I remember correctly and was our local MP and was vociferous in its application. We were NOT lawyers, and did as we were told in those days.

I have already conceded the point that 'we are all creatures of our experiences' so are you now denying me the right to use mine for illustration?

OK you make the point that there are many organisations who take in migrants - fine but do they take on the LIFELONG responsibility for them? This is what is required of a country that accepts migrants - not just a few weeks or even a few years but for life and often for the life of their descendants.

Where do these organisations and individuals get the money for this - from their own pockets? If so then I applaud them, and long may they continue their good work, but not if it is just as temporary transit camps which encourage others and does nothing to resolve the overall issue.

I am afraid Brian, and as we have discussed before you were never a wealth-creator and as such have a blindspot as to where money comes from to pay for all this. It is one reason why I totally support LEGAL migration where these issues are taken into consideration.

46

Yes, right on the trafficking, but projects for ethnic cleansing? The scale of trafficking at its most extreme never gets that far. However, ethnic cleansing is still going on in a big way, including on this continent and certainly also contributes to people wishing to escape it.

47

Your opening bit is not actually correct. It became illegal to discriminate, but not as you are implying illegal not to rent to them. In fact, landlords soon found out that they were willing to pay over the odds and suddenly welcomed them with open arms, and around 25-30% higher rent that others. At least, that is was like round our way. People could still discriminate by fibbing and it was never compulsory to rent to them anyway, so those who did not want them still would simply say that the room had just been let and take down the notice for a week. The whole period was crawled over by people studying the housing situation and the Housing Act 1957 is so well documented by all manner of people that anybody interested could build an entire library on the topic. Strangely enough, one part is forgotten, many of the landlords/ladies also refused to rent to women until then but never dared put that on the signs.

We were in council flats ourselves, some of which sublet rooms and that was where ethnic minorities lived in a mish-mash of nationalities (our Polish neighbours, although Jewish) had Pakistani Moslems and Irish Roman Catholics sharing a room well after 1957. Ironically, the discrimination elsewhere seemed to create solidarity where it was not applied.

Anyway, the question of legality has been repeated several times over Norman, but you need to reread the thread. The way you put it is not how it is. The people are not illegal until the fact is, if possible, established. 'Illegals' is the language of media.

Australia was treating its indigenous people as savages who had to be restricted to particular parts of Australia that were often good for nothing, at least until large mineral deposits or similar were found under them. The laws of the time forbade them to go to cities, take work other than the listed activities they were allowed, were not given any official papers and certainly not passports, the official discrimination from the 1860s until 1980s is the most awful story, as bad as apartheid but less well know. Why on earth do we regularly see reports about Australian politicians going out to ask the forgiveness of the people? It extended to mixed race people and in the laws until at least the 1960s women of European descent who bore children by 'aboriginal' were committing a punishable 'immoral' act for which many went into mental hospitals and a few prisons. The babies were taken away to be put in institutions and there are thousands still trying to find out who there parents are/were and claim compensation. Outside of their 'reservations' the indigenous people were illegal. So much for Australia's wonderful way of dealing with the issue.

As for migrants. Well, a good number of them are amongst us anyway. Remember back there in the 1950s when post-WW2 they were 'imported' for their labour and the large proportions of any western European population who are descended from them. Many of them were also fleeing wars, later on sure but Biafra between 1967-70 in Nigeria. It saw many refugees who actually had British Commonwealth passports because they were born prior to independence in 1960. That is just an example, there are many others. Many of the people the UK welcomed were economic migrants. They played a very important part in making the UK that boomed in its time, now their descendants are often unwanted.

As for people taking in migrants, legal or otherwise, you would be surprised Norman. There are entire networks of people of many origins who do. My ex and I had only four over the years, all of them visa over-stayers. Mind you, back in 1970 I married one who was under threat of deportation back to her own country. Although she called herself Corsican, she was legally a French citizen. Even after we were married she had conditions attached. It is not as simple as you see it Norman, and many people who have 'been there and done that' are quite the opposite to the 'anti' stance you believe experience breeds.

48

Todays word = Extrapolting

"extend the application of (a method or conclusion) to an unknown situation by assuming that existing trends will continue or similar methods will be applicable"

Norman, you are Sir Humphrey and I claim my £5 !

49

Hi Julian, there seems to be a contradcition on this as I paid as into the scheme whch deducted money from my salaries and which I also paid into as a self-employed person. This was in Vctoria (Melbourne) between collectively 1969-89.

I had a National Insurance number and Centrelink stated that I was a qualified recipient of an Age Pension (Victoria? Australia?) but that Payments Protocols did not exist between Australia and France. I checked as I still had an address of my brother in the UK , which was when I was surprised to learn a protocol also did not exist with Britain either.

Over the following years including taking this up with John Howard the PM at the time the para you referred to was obviously a fobbing-off activity, but each time it all changed ever so slightly including on one occasion being told (over the phone but not confirmed in writing) that all records prior to 2000 had been destroyed and therefore there was no way to check my claim against my own records!

That DID shock me, but as I say was never confirmed in writing. Then came the 'only if you live in Australia' bit, and then llast year 'and only based on need, and no longer a right'.

In the interim I did check out my early ten years of working in the UK, and was awarded a part-pension from them, and that is all I get.

I do get help in the medical area from France, but whether that is charged back to the UK I don't know.

I was advised by someone in Australia that the simple fact of having no debts and owning outright my/our own home would be enough to disqualify us on the 'needs' basis of the Australian system anyway, so we gave up, which patently was the idea in the first place. We just wasted time ultimately. But I suppose it still irritates when I read of the benefits illegal migrants get to the detriment as I see it of 'legitimate' pensioners in Australia.

50

I'm afraid that para had been reiterated to us over the past ten years, plus Centrelink telling us to contact every year to see if the situation has changed - which it never has except for the worse.

The people at Centrelink have been very pleasant but their hands are tied. We left Australia in 1989 and I had paid into the State Pension scheme as was for 16 of those years, my wife for 12. Much as I loved Australia as you can imagine I haven't been happy about this situation.

Re. moving to Germany etc., I have moved a lot in my life but not so much after the age of 70, and can't see myself rushing down that path. I did check on having an address in Italy, but again had to provide all the usual utility bills to prove residence (EU residence no longer meaning anything in Australia). Anyway our latest missive from Centrelink now says 'Age pensions are no longer a right, and will ONLY be paid to those resident on Australia and on a needs base'

As I say we just gave up after ten years of battling, called facing reality which I have done many times in my life.

51

Precisely.

52

There is the OAU in Africa isn't there? Plus there are assorted Regional Free Trade type associations (all terribly pragmatic and by definition probably right-wing?).Why can't they take the responsibility for developing the countries economically - after all isn't that what they were founded to do?

Foreign Aid can remain a choice for other countries, but not directed in lump sums and un-documented to Politicians, but to professional organisations and if necessary put in 'administrators' from different donor countries to ensure the money goes where intended and not in personal pockets.

This used to be called priming the pumps. It does not need to be political or politically biased. The Chinese are currently creating employment and factories in Africa - albeit based on very cheap labour, but it IS developing industries and not just throwing money away uselessly as happens now with Western countries.

Brian just to finalise this a bit take a look at the bottom lower left corner of your maps. Where does that border with? Egypt. Why was that also blocaded during the recent Israeli Palestinian conflict? Israel at least had a reason, however misguided and unhelpful,to protect its own borders, but why Egypt?

For despite your protestations to the contrary they also recognise Hamas as a Terrorist organisation and unwelcome in their country - itself not noted for tolerance and the milk of human kindness.

The problem remains in my view that simply bouncing real or unreal figures around means nothing,viewing history, important as that might be, I find typically left-wing thinking. (Using my definition of left-wing as being dreamers and impractical).

Things need to get done, and as the old making omelettes thing goes, eggs will have to be broken and not everyone will be pleased. The system is broke and needs to be fixed, and simply quoting figures and metaphorical wringing of hands ain't gonna do it! Putting plasters over things doesn't heal the problem, the root causes need to be addressed as others have said where they start.

What puzzles me is how so few have seen the opportunities these situations offer to business generally. Even the religious nutters are, not offering anything of this world to the poor just some sort of spurious afterlife.

Create work and business in these places and I will give you a written guarantee that the vast majority of problems will be sorted in situe. It won't happen in a week, but a serious ten-years of applied common-sense and drive I believe would dramatically change the situation. Heads will need to be knocked together, and probaly a few Immams bounced, but at the end of the day one thing that stays constant is a full belly, and only business will get that for people, not quoting numbers and wailing from the roof-tops.

53

Brian nowhere have I suggested that European Countries dictate terms to any African or Middle Eastern country, in fact exactly the opposite. Europe or America simply CANNOT accept responsibility for the rest of the World's problems.

Europe must sort out its problems, Asia its problems, South America its problems, even the USA must sort out its problems and so it goes.

Incidentally there already IS a Palestinian State which everyone seems to ignore. It has the name of Jordan and is 80% Palestinian. I worked there and they are not downtrodden but do have a couple of 'professional' refugee camps for the pollies to see.

Plus of course as we all tend to overlook it tht the whole region is virulently anti-Israel, and anti-Semitic which I thought was non-acceptable in the West?

Please Brian don't go into the historic roots of Semitism, as however valid it might be it is not accepted by most Middle Eastern countries.

54

Peter,

That is sad to hear although understandable, but aren't you criticising others for doing what you 'fear' of being labelled?

I accept totally the whole societal thing of 'fitting in' as being normal and even laudable but might I suggest that is exactly what happened with the rise of the Dictators Brian has just mentioned?

In many respects I think I have gone a fair way beyond particularly bothered about being 'legal, decent and honest' although I probably like to think I fall into two of thiose categories, 'legal' as I haven't got the brains or memory to be a crook, and 'honest' as I believe I am often painfully so - notably with myself and my myriad failings (often aided by SWMBO it must be accepted!)

Decent? Not sure about that as it covers too much territory. Would I overtly declare physical chastisement on others? Yes, definitely - for those who commit cruelty on animals and children (does that latter surprise you Brian?) notably. On others including religious fanatics yes, again definitely.

Personally I am not homophobic, but do have concerns about the rights of children currently being raised - surrogacy etc.

Am I against Pornography, No, except if it is involving innocent children, or forced on anyone, and ditto with Prostitution.

Am I against War? Probably but I can see occasions where it becomes inevitable.

Religion? By and large I am against Churches and organised groups, and overall see it as the opiate of the masses, and I am not a druggie in anything.

Am I against the current crop of vulgarity in the entertainment industry, yes definitely as it is exploitation of the worst kind in my view. Ditto with public nudity of all types.

So 'decent' is much harder to define, and I suppose my views on immigration expressed here and elsewhere would be regarded a harsh and indecent by others, so others can freely make that judgement.

55

Brian then you are denying that Left wing is practical? That is precisely what I am saying, so there is no disagreement there.

I wonder how many here remember the over-simplistic way we used to refer to Labour and Conservative in my area anyway - 'Conservatives (Right wing) Make the Money - Labour (Left-wing) spend it!

The basic premise being the Right Wing Pragmatists create the wealth of a Nation and the Left Wing Dreamers spend it.

Guess which wing I am on? Go on I'll be generous and give you three options!

56

Mike aren't you extrapolating rather a lot? I don't agree with what Mike said either - or how apparently it has been interpreted, but where did you get the rest of this from? Where did he mention the horrors you list? Where did he promote these things?

I don't think Freedom of Speech allows for you to put words into others mouths, or am I wrong. Comment on what he said by all means but really you are stretching a very long bow in this instance

I think you might be mixing up different cultures although you don't clarify to which your are referring.

57

Australian Pensions are no longer payable to those who do not live in Australia. Full stop.

I have been fighting to get my Pension 'rights' for ten years since 1965 when I reached retirement age as has my wife. We have now given up, as it is proving too stressful. We have heard similar stories now from now disabled members of the military also being affected with reduced benefits.

Then people wonder why the natives get restless when there were riots from illegal migrants demanding this and demanding that?

It started when we were told neither Britain nor France have a 'protocol' with Australia to enable such payments. Countries that did were Italy, Greece and would you believe Chile? Then after a few years of battling it was then decided that Pensions are no longer a 'right' (even though bought on that basis), and are now deemed to be 'Means Tested' and ONLY for those who live in Australia.

My sister-in-law in New Zealand has just discovered the same applies there. Her hope of returning to France gone.

58

Then the law changed Mike and it became ILLEGAL not to rent a room to someone who was Irish (although I don't remember that one personally) or to someone Colored. Now it may come as a surpise to you but my mother had rarely even seen a black person in any shape way or form. She hadn't grown up with television or many of the visual reference or information points. Yes, she thought they were aliens, and could have come from Mars for all she knew.

Suddenly the opposite of what you are saying occurred- and she HAD to rent out to a colored person who wanted or she would theoretically at least have been hauled before the iniquitous Race Relations Board which did more to foster anti-racial attitudes tha anything. I won't even raise the question of where her 'Huming Rights' were in all of this.

She could refuse an Scotsman, or a Lancastrian or a Cornishman or a Frenchman or a German or anyone else but NOT an Irishman or a Colored person. You should also recollect there was a certain animosity toward the Irish and some cases you might also recall of them killing a lot of innocent people in England? Now it was COMPULSORY (i.e. PC) to accept those who we read were bombing us - and please don't get onto the days of the potato famine etc as that had nothing to do with the people being blown up.

Another convenient thing you seem to have forgotten was that the Irish were allowed to live and work in England for six months in a year and not pay tax. Also don't forget that this was EIRE (as was) who hated the Brits, but were quite logically prepared to take what was on offer - again i.e. exactly the same as the illegal migrants of today.

I know these from personal experience as my Mother had to rent out a small spare room to eke out a bloody precarious living for our fatherless family.

Brian (Milne) once made a very perspicacious comment in that 'we are all creatures of our experience(s)' which is absolutely true. Thiis is probably why those of us who have literally 'been there - done that' probably have stronger and usually 'anti' views on many things because of that fact. I would go further and say that every action has a reaction on all sides.

You also elsewhere took Australia to task on being 'unwelcome to foreigners'. That is the biggest load of cobblers I have ever read even from a whingeing Pom! Second only to 19th America NO country on this planet took in more 'bloody foreigners' as you describe it than any other. The country in case you don't recall was built on immigrants and when I migrated there in 1968 I was far from treated as a bloody foreigner for the simple reason I made every effort to fit in and make a contriubution to my adopted country.

There were many who didn't. A lot of Brits went over and tried to Lord it over these 'Colonials' and yes, they did get short shrift from the Aussies. This basic attitude has not changed and this is the cause of the current issues there where illegals are trying to change the laws and the culture. I recall very clearly the average dinner table in Australia would have/could have easily up to 10 different countries represented through those seated.

Granted there were very few blacks to be seen, but there were Chinese, Vietnamese, Japanese and every other Nation on the planet.

The BIG difference? They were all LEGAL migrants. Australia's points system worked in that it could absorb people into the society at all levels - housing, work and health. When illegals invade the system fails as it has failed in every country where this has happened.

This has been my consistent point in all this. Get real people, illegal immigration is bad for everybody not least the illegals themselves, and guess what it doesn't get better, just worse.

Bleed all over the carpet with sympathy and I can understand that, but let me pose one question. How many illegal migrants are you PERSONALLY prepared to take care of - in other words feed, house, clothe, find work for, take care of in all ways and all their descendants? Not the State, YOU personally?

59

Jon, let me be "politically incorrect": the solution only comes with an enlightenment: the so called "civilized" world, also known as "the west", or "international community" realizes that the R2P (responsibility to protect) is wishful thinking. If it would ever work we first have to stop to fiddle in other states internal affairs. And we have to stop to sell these dictators and medieval princes arms. Only then people will stand up in their own countries. The Calais problem is marginal comparing to the drowning of people in the Mediterranean sea. But both have their root in organized crimes call human trafficking. The profits off this trafficking goes in ever more "projects" for "ethnic cleansing".

60

Unfortunately papers were removed from people objecting to dictatorial regimes and these were the educated sections of the population, university lecturers, teachers, doctors and writers.
It soon became apparent to others seeking asylum that if they destroyed their papers they could claim that this had been done by the regime from which they were needing to escape, hence the large number of people now arriving without papers.