Closing Calais

The French authorities say they will be closing the Calais camp in a few days time. They have a lot of work to do in the meantime, to find out who is there, what rights they have to stay or to work or to receive an education in the EU and how their futures should be taken care of. There are many adults, and all too many unaccompanied children.

The UK has said that it will take unaccompanied children who have family in the UK willing to look after them, and will help the French by also taking some children who do not have family members who can take care of them. The Home Office has sent officials to Calais to help the French talk to the migrants to see who should be eligible to come to the UK, and then to make the necessary arrangements. Of course the UK is a guest in Calais and has to work under French direction.

The Calais camp is what happens when large numbers of migrants and refugees are allowed to enter the EU elsewhere without proper consideration of their legal rights and needs. It is not good for the travellers or for the host nations. Putting off making a decision about their eligibility and needs leads to delay and to these worrying encampments which are far from satisfactory for those living in them.

The priority in dealing with the children should be in putting them back with family members capable of looking after them. Presumably some adult put the child on the long road to Calais and provided money to pay for the perilous journey. It would be good to know in each case who did this and what help they or other responsible adults in the family can now offer the child if they are not resident in a war zone.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

137 Comments

  1. DaveM
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 5:27 am | Permalink

    Looking at the pictures, when you say “children” I presume you mean anyone under the age of 45?

    • Timaction
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 8:32 am | Permalink

      No women or girls amongst them. Who was doing the vetting? Corbinistas from the Home Office?

      • Hope
        Posted October 19, 2016 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

        Reported in the papers a journalist raped at knifepoint by teenage refugees. Is this the action of refugees? Reported that a mayor in Germany cannot cope with th crimes of refugees? Once more, are these really refugees. If this is the way they act when the should be grateful what is their behaviour like when unhappy?

    • Brian Tomkinson
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 8:35 am | Permalink

      Dave,
      Agreed. Questions should be asked in the Commons about how these ‘children’ were selected.

    • Vanessa
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 10:43 am | Permalink

      I agree – these are certainly NOT children. Do we know who they are; what their intentions are; do they have “contacts” here? It all looks incredibly suspicious to me. I was expecting children of 8 years to about 14 years. 45 and up more like !!!! How many guns, hand granades and ammunition to they have? What is there attitude to British women? Asking for even more trouble.

      • Jerry
        Posted October 18, 2016 at 7:07 pm | Permalink

        @Vanessa et al; Under UK (and probably EU and UN) law “children” are anyone under the age of 18 years of age, even though by that age many will have started full-time work, some might even have joined the military, with parental consent can get married – never mind having been biologically capable of becoming mothers and fathers…

        Plenty of 15 year old Anglo-Saxon ‘children’ look far older, even before grooming themselves to look older, whilst it is also common for those from middle-eastern and Indian subcontinent to appear very mature at an even younger age.

        Having said that, my question is why Britain needs to be the “safe haven” for such people anyway, has the UN declared that France is no longer a safe haven country for refugees, why can’t these children be housed in French children’s homes (or even foster care) until their status has been ascertained?

        • Edward2
          Posted October 19, 2016 at 8:17 am | Permalink

          You miss the point again Jerry
          Vanessa said she thought many were not children
          IE That they were over 18

          • Jerry
            Posted October 19, 2016 at 5:22 pm | Permalink

            @Edward2; Once again you show that you have replied without actually reading my comment properly. How is stating the facts missing the point?! What did you not understand about the medical fact that some in some races children mature faster, meaning that two children of the same age can actually look as though years separate them.

            Also what you and others are missing is that we only have the say-so of the europhobic MSM that the pictures they have published of ‘migrants of doubtful age’ have been accepted (for transfer in)to the UK, how do we know that they are not images of people refused entry?

          • Edward2
            Posted October 20, 2016 at 6:13 am | Permalink

            Your repeated accusations of not reading your posts is boring and wrong. Jerry
            Perhaps you need to re read what you say before endlessly posting.
            Here you are arguing a lost cause.
            The immigration services have said over two thirds claiming to be children when checked are found to be over age.

          • Jerry
            Posted October 20, 2016 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

            @Edward2; “The immigration services have said over two thirds claiming to be children when checked are found to be over age.”

            Then they will bot be entering the UK will they! You do realise that the UK immigration services are doing these checks in France before anyone is transferred to the UK. What is your problem other than wishing to have a europhobic rant (whilst trolling me) that is?…

          • Edward2
            Posted October 21, 2016 at 8:04 pm | Permalink

            Just an indication of the level of abuse the immigration services need to process before letting in people without ID Jerry
            Adults pretending to be children can cause all kinds of secondary problems in foster homes and education establishments

          • jerry
            Posted October 22, 2016 at 7:25 am | Permalink

            @Edward2; Thanks for confirming that you are more interested in having a rant than the actual facts (never mind any humanity), you could have said the above in your first comment but no….

        • Anonymous
          Posted October 19, 2016 at 10:29 am | Permalink

          Jerry – When we were told ‘vulnerable children’ were coming we all thought under 10s. Not the strapping blokes of indeterminable age we are seeing.

          • Jerry
            Posted October 19, 2016 at 5:26 pm | Permalink

            @Anonymous; That is why I posted the comment I did, to correct such ignorance of the law! I was just stating the facts, not necessarily agreeing with the governments policy, hence my comment asking why the French government can not keep these children safe.

          • Edward2
            Posted October 21, 2016 at 8:08 pm | Permalink

            So what are you saying actually Jerry?
            That those other than you don’t know 18 is the legally accepted year when a child passes legally to being an adult?
            Because we do know that
            The central point is
            How do you audit people who gain advantage in the immigration process by claiming they are children

          • jerry
            Posted October 22, 2016 at 7:49 am | Permalink

            @Edward2; My point was that some, such as yourself, have been to quick to judge others by what the British europhobic tabloid media have been saying and not the facts.

            As for your question about the immigration process, those who need to know, know (and perhaps it is not the best idea to give fraudsters advantage by discussing such tests on the internet), those with common sense will have a good guess, those without a clue and no wish to accept a logical argument or pathway will carry on having their europhobic or anti migrant rants – or indeed illegal migrants will carry on trying to play the system.

        • APL
          Posted October 20, 2016 at 6:39 am | Permalink

          Jerry: “Plenty of 15 year old Anglo-Saxon ‘children’ look far older, ..”

          Yea, but they are not queuing up to get into Saudi Arabia or Iran are they?

          I don’t even know why you put the scare quotes around Anglo-Saxon ‘children’, legally they are children if they are under 18. So 15 year olds are children!

          A very significant number of the so called ‘jungle children’, clearly are not children.

          Most Anglo-Saxon children can’t even get into a Pub in their own country without ID. So why we are letting in people without the correct identification to our country is a mystery to me.

          Perhaps we should replace the border agency with a few stout barmaids. They’d be able to sort the under age children from the frauds.

    • Nigel
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 10:55 am | Permalink

      And no girls.

    • Hope
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

      No more we have enough problems of our own. Over crowding impacting to see a doctor, dentist, getting a house, jobs for young people. Still no sight in stopping allmforns of immigration as it is. We had a record number arrive here this year and May has done absolutely nothing. If these people choose not to bring identity papers to make it difficult to process them then they should not even be processed. They present an unnecessary a security risk and our security services and Border Angency cannot cope as it is. Merkel wanted them and invited them to come they should be assisted with travel to Germany. She created the problem, no quotas to share around.

      • fedupsoutherner
        Posted October 18, 2016 at 5:32 pm | Permalink

        Hope, Hear, hear. It’s about time the Uk got serious over this problem. We didn’t vote OUT for nothing.

      • Chris
        Posted October 18, 2016 at 9:52 pm | Permalink

        I agree, Hope. The Government appears weak and ineffectual. Hugely damaging for the whole Brexit narrative.

        • Timaction
          Posted October 19, 2016 at 7:11 am | Permalink

          There is no appears. The Government and all the legacy parties are weak, ineffectual but on that gravy chain. Until they bury the cancer of political correctness nothing will change. All Government departments like The Home Office, the FCO and the Treasury are the arms of P C and it’s EU mission to destroy Nation states. Root and branch reform is needed to remove their malign influence.

          • Ken Moore
            Posted October 19, 2016 at 4:34 pm | Permalink

            Its strange how the politically correct lobby refer to these alleged 16 and 17 year olds as ‘children’ and not the usual PC term of ‘young people’.
            Whatever fits their agenda – children become ‘young adults’ whenever a referendum etc. needs the votes of the young and gullible. Then it’s back to ‘children’ if a young person commits a serious crime and needs to be detained for a long period..

            Is anyone going to stand up to this ridiculous situation – will it take the rape or assault of a genuine ‘child’ in state care to make the authorities take note of the resentment this policy is causing ?.

            No mention in Dr Redwood’s article of the blatant stupidity of the home office being duped into accepting a number of male migrants which clearly are not children.
            Why should the people of Wokingham and beyond be asked to accommodate a group of people we do not know enough about so that a narrow Westminister elite can feel better about themselves ?

    • Iain Gill
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 4:24 pm | Permalink

      yep they don’t look like children to me

      more like 20 or 30 something

      whats this a new game where anyone can say they are 17 and enter the country?

      also kids of people who have recently been firing at British troops in various hotspots seem to be in the mix

      once again our country looks like a laughing stock

  2. Brexit Facts4EU.org
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 5:32 am | Permalink

    O/T, sorry. Dr Redwood, yesterday you wrote a good piece about trade which prompted many comments and questions from your readers.

    Late afternoon we received a legal report on this which we analysed overnight and which your readers may find helpful. The facts about the Customs Union and its relation to EEA/EFTA are explained here:
    http://facts4eu.org/news.shtml#customs_union_1 There is a link to the full report.

    In short, it shows that you are right.

    • David Price
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 7:09 am | Permalink

      Interesting report. Even more interesting for me is the related article concerning the TARGET2 arrangements and just how dependent Germany is on non-EU exports beyond their apparent relative proportion to intra-EU exports.

      http://www.lawyersforbritain.org/eu-deal-germany-cant-afford-hard-bargain.shtml

      It would seem that when the French and Belgian “negotiators” threaten the UK they are really putting the interests and welfare of the German taxpayer, worker and saver in jeopardy.

    • O/T,O/T
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 8:13 am | Permalink

      Brexit etc
      As far as I can see, in the few months I’ve been reading him, he is always right.

    • David Lister
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 10:53 am | Permalink

      Dear BrexitFacts4EU,

      This is a very useful report and describes the implications of leaving the Customs Union well.

      Its interesting that it makes no reference to operating under a WTO only model, as it assumes that outside the Customs Union a Free Trade Agreement will exist; it does nothing to support Mr Redwood’s assertion that a fall-back position is to trade under WTO should a FTA not be achieved within 2 years.

      Whichever way you look at it, the outcome is not favorable towards future trade with the EU:

      1) We cannot remain in the Customs Union when we leave the EU unless we accept subservience to the EU.

      2) The alternative to the Customs Union is a Free Trade Agreement to maintain trade. However no reference is made of the time it would take to negotiate a FTA whilst external references point to >>2 years for Iceland and Swizterland (+10year). It does nothing to support the view by Mr Redwood that a FTA can be negotiated quickly.

      3) On restrictions of rights: “They cannot be negotiated away, or it ceases to be a working customs union.” This means that the approach proposed by Mr Redwood on novation of existing legal treaties to the UK is not possible. We are either in the Customs Union, or out; and if we are out then the EU can not pass over the rights to a Third Country.

      4) A Free Trade Agreement (assuming it can be achieved in 2 years,) leads to “an administrative cost” because unlike being in the Customs Union ” rules of origin controls are not needed”. This means that there will be more red-tape in trade with the EU as all goods have to demonstrate that they conform to a Mutual Recognition Agreement and appropriate tariffs have been paid. There is no evidence in this briefing of a “bonfire of red-tape” that many on this site have alluded to.

      Before the Referendum the Smith Institute on June 13th reported from their final survey that there was a 2 to 1 support for an EEA Brexit option and last week ComRes reported that a majority continue to favour Trade Deals over immigration.

      It seems odd that on this blog there is a continuing appetite for WTO trade arrangements in defiance of the Customs Union, or even an FTA. There seems to be incorrect assumption that other countries operate without trade agreement ignoring the Treaty Database.

      In short, there is nothing in this briefing that shows that Mr Redwood is right.

    • James Munroe
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 11:28 am | Permalink

      Very interesting.

      Can you please confirm the situation concerning taking back control of our borders, and also immigration rights.

    • David Lister
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 12:47 pm | Permalink

      Dear Brexit Fact4EU.org,

      In your various chapters (on Lawyers for Britain) on International Treaties, and Negotiating with the EU, I note that you clearly state that the alternative to the Customs Unions is a Free Trade Agreement.

      I can find no reference to operating under WTO treaties alone as promoted by Mr Redwood.

      Is this omission something you plan to put right in future updates? As Mr Redwood points out, it is critical that we have a fall-back position when entering negotiations as it may prove impossible to complete a Free Trade Agreement within 2-years.

      Whilst I appreciate there is a lot of wishful thinking that Trade Agreements can be conducted quickly there is no evidence that this will be the case, yet there is plenty of evidence FTA may take many years to negotiate.

      Therefore a proper analysis of the fall-back position, operating under only WTO, would be a valuable contribution. This could helpfully address questions such as: What rules governing border inspections would be required? What regulations, and mutually recognition of goods are required? What rules of origin would be followed?

      I note that in the Europa Treaty Database, even those countries that are often referred to as operating under WTO (ie. Australia, China, US, ..) have typically ~80 treaties to facilitate trade. Are these all essential for the UK to trade in a similar manner?

    • Hope
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

      Reported in the papers today that a 40 day old child was offered for sale on eBay in Germany. It turned out to be a child of a refugee. The police launched an investigation and the father handed himself in!

      • Jerry
        Posted October 18, 2016 at 7:16 pm | Permalink

        @Hope; If that is the same story I read about (not in the UK MSM) then the ebay sale was never intended to happen – sounds more of a cry for help – but let’s not allow the facts to get in the way of a UK tabloid’s wish to spin such a story with a anti migrant or europhobic slant.

        • Edward2
          Posted October 19, 2016 at 8:19 am | Permalink

          Your bias not Hope’s Jerry.
          Are you saying it should not be reported?
          It happened, the father handed himself into the Police

          • jerry
            Posted October 22, 2016 at 7:56 am | Permalink

            @Edward2; You are wrong as usual but then you sem to lap up what ever the you read in the Daily Maul or what ever like the cats got the cream, this event did not happen as the UK MSM has reported it, the actual facts are available if you go looking – nor do you need to read German.

        • Hope
          Posted October 19, 2016 at 3:20 pm | Permalink

          You always think you know everything Jerry, quite boring and usually always short in evidence.

          • Jerry
            Posted October 19, 2016 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

            @Hope; “You always think you know everything [you are] quite boring and usually always short in evidence.”

            Talk about the Pot calling the kettle black – or perhaps our host deleted, sans his usual moderation note, your URL to the said evidence that proves yours and the newspapers assertions…

    • John O'Leary
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

      No it does not show that he is right! The three Efta members of the EEA are not subject to the ECJ. In case of dispute the member may take the advice of the Efta court, but this, unlike the ECJ, is not binding.

    • David Lister
      Posted October 19, 2016 at 8:48 am | Permalink

      Dear BrexitFacts4EU,

      This is a very useful report and describes the implications of leaving the Customs Union well.

      Its interesting that it makes no reference to operating under a WTO only model, as it assumes that outside the Customs Union a Free Trade Agreement will exist; it does nothing to support assertions that a fall-back position is to trade under WTO should a FTA not be achieved within 2 years.

      Whichever way you look at it, the outcome is not favorable towards future trade with the EU:

      1) We cannot remain in the Customs Union when we leave the EU unless we accept subservience to the EU.

      2) The alternative to the Customs Union is a Free Trade Agreement to maintain trade. However no reference is made of the time it would take to negotiate a FTA whilst external references point to >>2 years for Greenland and Swizterland (+10year). It does nothing to support the view that a FTA can be negotiated quickly.

      3) On restrictions of rights: “They cannot be negotiated away, or it ceases to be a working customs union.” This means that the approach proposed by Mr Redwood on novation of existing legal treaties to the UK is not possible. We are either in the Customs Union, or out; and if we are out then the EU can not pass over the rights to a Third Country.

      4) A Free Trade Agreement (assuming it can be achieved in 2 years,) leads to “an administrative cost” because unlike being in the Customs Union ” rules of origin controls are not needed”. This means that there will be more red-tape in trade with the EU as all goods have to demonstrate that they conform to a Mutual Recognition Agreement and appropriate tariffs have been paid. There is no evidence in this briefing of a “bonfire of red-tape” that many on this site have alluded to.

  3. Mark B
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 5:36 am | Permalink

    Good morning.

    If by children you mean those under a certain age they will not be cared for by the parents or family members, it will be the UK tax payer. Child benefits, free education, healthcare and travel.

    And if, like some very minor celeb, you want to redefine what a child is, then what is it ?

    If this camp is to be cleared, like all the Calais camps before, will there not need to be one set up as people are still intent on wanting to come here. And that is the problem. The UK is seen, rightly or wrongly, as the land of milk and honey, where everything is free. And I really do mean free, as in free for them and not those who have to pay for it.

    In any case, what sort of parent leaves their child ?

    I tire of politicians trying to play, Mother Teresa with my money and finding evermore clever ways of circumventing immigration. This is a French problem that they have allowed to happen. They should have sent them back to the first point of entry.

    Once again, the UK government is shown to be weak and ineffectual.

  4. alan jutson
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 5:39 am | Permalink

    Am I alone or is it just me that finds it strange that you could have parents, who I guess have entered the UK legally, but who have left children behind to make their own way here, probably illegally.

    What caring family member would leave their kids behind to go to another Country, with no one to look after or care for them.

    Certainly can understand a husband searching for work abroad and leaving the rest of the family behind with their partner or wife.

    Perhaps even if both husband and wife have gone abroad to try to find work and you have left the children with other family members, but why are they still not with them !

    If we are not careful we are opening the way for many more family members/relations to come here, or attempt to come here on the simple basis they already have a family member in the UK.

    Aware that conditions en-route must be terrible, and certainly some people will be genuine refugees, I only hope proper checks are being completed on all before they are allowed to enter the UK.

    • Dame Rita Webb
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 7:15 am | Permalink

      Have the parents and children had a DNA test to prove who they say they are? I bet not! Presumably we will be billing the French health and social services for doing what they could not be bothered to do?

    • Iain Moore
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 7:26 am | Permalink

      Indeed, it does seem to be a ‘right’ that will leave us open to accommodating exponential numbers of people.

      It seems our political classes always find ways of increasing the levels of immigration.

      I also find it odd that we are giving people from countries where though there might be some areas of conflict, also have areas that are safe, the right to asylum here. Why aren’t they going to the safe areas of their country?

      Let alone giving asylum to people who have engaged in warfare against out troops, as the father of the ‘child’ who so moved Lily Allen , who has been given the right to live here, though he had been a Taliban fighter. Are we mad?

      It seem to me the Asylum system is a blank cheque written by a past generation that we have no hope of honoring. The numbers of Asylum seekers who might have a right to come here are so vast, especially with the expanded definition of it , that we might as well be honest about it, it is unmanageable , it is beyond our ability to cope. as such we should withdraw from the UN Convention.

    • stred
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 7:26 am | Permalink

      Also, if the family are in the UK legally, why do they not take the ferry and find their child in the jungle. Then they should find accommodation in France and apply for asylum or to come to the UK. Why do bleeding heart charities or officials have to ‘rescue’ them?

      There is a telling article in this weeks Spectator- The road to the Jungle. A young man from Nigeria is interviewed who has been trying to stop lorries and come to ‘his fatherland’. he came from southern Nigeria, where there is no war but he used to be in some gang of ‘cultists’ and his mother said he should leave to be safe. He came via Italy where he was sent straight from the south to the north and then by bus to Calais with help from a charity. Presumably, he is one among the thousands that the Italian navy and charities rescue from just outside Libyan waters.

      They know that the UK will not deport them. The reason is that the Home Office follows UN directions, as explained by their Irish director Mr P Sutherland, that migrants from poor countries should also be considered refugees and that they are valuable to economies with low birth rates. His guidance is preferred over the advice of the President of Nigeria when he addressed the EU parliament and pointed out that there is no reason to accept them as refugees and that they should be sent back.

      The civil servants follow the rules of others in the international pyramid of policy and law. It is not their job to do what ordinary people or lesser politicians se as sensible.

    • liz
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 8:49 am | Permalink

      All these adult looking children are male – where are the girls/women – it is all a bit of a mystery as to how they got to France and nobody seems to make any effort to find out? The British left wing media and France have, successfully it seems, made strenuous efforts to blame Britain for the Calais “jungle” and lone children when it is the first country they entered who should have taken responsibility for any refugee and it is the EU open borders policy that allowed them to get as far as Calais/France. That France has allowed the “jungle” to exist at all does not reflect well on their country. The fact that most refugees/migrants want to come here is irrelevant – not so many would if the EU open borders did not make it so easy for them to travel around Europe at will. Most EU countries have adopted a “pass the parcel” policy with these refugees/migrants rather than the legal one.

      • rose
        Posted October 19, 2016 at 9:07 am | Permalink

        I’m afraid the French have a point: it is that our overgenerous welfare state, our lack of ID cards, and our thriving black market are pulling these men like a magnet to our shores. I agree they have a duty to round them up and send them back, but the EU culture encourages nations not to be responsible. The EU will sort it out.

        Similarly, Italy, Spain, and Greece have for far too long been waving the men through to Northern Europe, often with EU passports. One of our sensible Archbishops pointed this out, despite what the two silly ones are saying.

    • Mitchel
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 8:59 am | Permalink

      …or who entered the UK illegally and have since been regularised.

    • SM
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 9:03 am | Permalink

      While I understand your points, may I say that, coming from a Central European Jewish family whose members escaped Tsarist pogroms in Russia and Poland before WW1 and Nazi terror before WW2, quite what can be achieved under such circumstances is unbelievable to our modern way of looking at things.s

      • Dame Rita webb
        Posted October 18, 2016 at 6:33 pm | Permalink

        Sorry but did your ancestors age as rapidly as the Home Office is suggesting happened to this lot due to the rigours of their odyysey? The children on the kinder-transports looked like kids these do not.

    • James Munroe
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 11:36 am | Permalink

      Many people were expecting to see the children coming over as being like that much vaunted photo of a smiling child (6 or 7 years of age) peaking out of a tent.

      It would be pretty heartless to stand in the way of bringing in young children who have a close relative in the UK.

      But those children are not going to make it, on their own, from a war torn country, to Calais.

      Most of the unaccompanied children will therefore be old enough to make their way alone, with some help from other migrants.

      Maybe some young children have been entrusted to other migrants as friends of the child’s parents. Risky to say the least!

      The ‘children’ coming here will therefore probably be early to late teens, with a number over, 18 posing as children.

    • Hope
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 3:21 pm | Permalink

      Nothing strange, a lot of them are Ecoonmic migrants trying it on. Hence no papers. They should have had their boats turned around instead of encouraging more to come.

  5. The Active Citizen
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 5:52 am | Permalink

    Imagine a migrant camp in England, where unaccompanied children were left in appalling conditions for many months, with nothing being done to take these children into care. I’m sure none of us can.

    Yet apparently this has been the case in France, our nearest neighbour and supposedly subject to the same human rights laws as the UK.

    Secondly, whilst I wholeheartedly want to see vulnerable children immediately taken care of, I won’t be the only one to ask about the pictures taken of the first 14 ‘children’ who arrived from Calais yesterday. The first two were in their 20s if they were a day.

    When aid workers and the British authorities allow such absurdities, they risk undermining the genuine compassion of the British people towards children who really are at risk.

    Finally, are people aware that in the French newspapers the responsibility for the lack of care for any (genuine) children with a right to come to the UK lies wholly with the UK authorities? This might come as some surprise to the British politicians and officials who have been trying to get the French to do something about this for years…

  6. alan jutson
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 5:56 am | Permalink

    Yes John we are guests of the French when we have officials working over there, and yes we have to a degree work with the French to resolve the problem in Calais, but we are not puppets of France.

    We must remember it was the French that let all of these people into their Country because they agree with a policy of complete freedom of movement within the EU, and the EU has encouraged people to travel to it by having a weak policy on immigration, and a weak boarder control system.

    Thus they are now paying the price of that policy.

    How many illegals are the French returning, how many people in the so called Jungle have had any sort of checks made on them when they break the law.
    How many have been arrested for trespass on the train tracks, or for entering the ports or for blockading the roads, or for attempting to break into vehicles.

    The problem is if they are caught they are simply ejected from the premises, and are ready and able to to try again and again.
    By the law of averages some people will get through to the UK, and thats what keeps them there until they succeed.

    The EU and the French have failed, and now we are picking up the bill.

  7. Roy Grainger
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 6:00 am | Permalink

    The gender balance of the refugees is notable isn’t it, you never see anything other than young men.

  8. Cheshire Girl
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 6:35 am | Permalink

    I personally, am very angry about this situation. I note that the Goverment has promised to take up to 300 ‘vulnerable’ children (up to the age of 18). They say they will take children who have relatives already here, and those whose ‘ best interests’ are served by coming to the UK. Well that could apply to any of them!
    When the first batch arrived yesterday, it was obvious that they were young men. We didnt get to see many pictures, but I didnt notice any girls among them. We could soon be seeing incidents such as those in Germany and other parts of Europe, where these young men commit sexual crimes against the girls here. If we do, I shall hold this Government entirely responsible, and will no longer vote for them.
    Apart from the above points, this will cost the taxpayer millions, at a time when our services are all creaking at the seams.
    Amber Rudd has a lot of questions to answer ! !

  9. Richard1
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 6:40 am | Permalink

    Interesting move from France this morning. France is to try to lure highly paid U.K. Bankers and others to Paris with tax breaks – I think I heard that M Valls, the French PM will propose 8 years of tax free bonuses! This is excellent stuff, the more competition between governments to create an attractive environment to live and work the more prosperous All countries will be, as tax borrow and spend socialism will become impossible. (Obviously it’s a bit odd coming from French socialists who have spent years railing against ‘social dumping’ and ‘tax dumping’, and specifically from M Valls who last week published an article in the FT arguing for tax harmonisation in The EU.). Still we should welcome it, and it should be a warning shot to Mrs May and Mr Hammond not to waste time and money on interventionist ‘red tory’ drivel but to focus relentlessly on competitiveness and productivity. Both Heathrow and Gatwick need the go ahead, we need to turbo charge shale gas and Mr Hammond needs to come up with some eye catching measures on tax competitiveness in the autumn statement. He should drop Osbornes foolish £90k non-Dom charge. I know know loads of highly paid foreigners who have departed as they no longer find the UK tax competitive. The continuing weakness of sterling is another warning. Mrs May has no more time to dither.

  10. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 6:57 am | Permalink

    Have these men-children been housed with Bob Geldof, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Yvette Cooper and other hand wringing superficial do Gooders?

    Or as is more likely are these bearded children and their “families” being given borrowed taxpayer funds and access to housing already in short supply?

    Why does this kind of unnecessary action impact the common man rather than those proposing the solution?

    Surely this is what charity and foreign aid is for.

  11. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 7:01 am | Permalink

    O/T but it is likely a contributor can answer.

    The European parliament is filled using PR.

    Why does an MEP who resigns from his party stay an MEP? If you have been appointed from a party list and you resign why does your place not go to the next candidate on the party list?

    Seems very strange to me.

  12. Northerner
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 7:14 am | Permalink

    My parents told me “kids had to grow up faster in our day”. It was the custom to have large families for economic/ social and practical reasons. A mother could and did request one of her female children to become “Mother’s Little Helper”. This meant schooling ended at the age of nine years old . This was in the 1914-18 war onwards and onwards by the way.

    I met such a lady who at the age of nine also went to act as server at table in a private boy’s school in addition to her motherly duties to her siblings.Boys ( poor ..nearly everyone ) went down the coalmine at 14 years of age. Their pitiful wages were desperately needed. My dad was such a “child” coalminer. He had passed for grammar school but his parents could not afford to send him there.

    You see, we were very very poor in the UK. Chronological age was pretty well meaningless. My parents said “We didn’t really have a childhood like now. We had to walk two miles to the farm each morning to collect a jug of milk before we went to school.”

    We should not assess “childhood” in our own terms. “You are like spoilt children” as more than one non-refugee but foreigners living in the eastern bloc told me frequently. They meant us. “Children” because we have lived a life nowadays with a real childhood that prevented us from being anything other than naive.

    A “child” soldier’s bullet from Africa, the Middle East, South America and Asia smarts just as much as a taller soldier’s bullet. Corbynista’s and even some Tories of the right need to grow up , stop being naive. We in the UK have made, constructed, invented, nurtured Childhood. We must grow up ourselves and realise the truth..Childhood does not exist in most to the world and I dare say, nor do children…not as we know them.
    We must assess everyone of all ages from abroad on the basis, also, of whether, despite our innermost feelings , they could present a security threat and in fact were trained, because of their size to get through more easily our security net. Their eyes are proportionately bigger when their bodies are smaller, and appeal to our emotions as do their tones of voice and seemingly un-adult private behaviour. Child soldiers often play at tag, hide-and-seek, flicking bits of paper at one another when not firing kalashnikovs at big people and babies alike or cutting off their heads and laughing about it.

    • secretpeople
      Posted October 21, 2016 at 9:41 am | Permalink

      I sympathise with your family’s back-story – mine is similar.

      But you are arguing the opposite to what you think you are. You describe children (in terms of chronological age) being made to adopt adult responsibilities. What we see drifting in from Calais is the exact opposite: adults reneging on their responsibilities and pretending to be children, all the while taking up resources meant for children and hardening attitudes towards them.

  13. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 7:35 am | Permalink

    Calais should be closed immediately. All children there should be collected by adult relatives living in the UK or elsewhere and they and the children remain in Calais or return to their country of origin ( no not the UK ).
    Train and other travel tickets plus other costs, food, accommodation en route should be made available for humanitarian reasons and stringent checks made they proceed with haste; that they do not at any stage along the predetemined and policed route stray or engage in any activity other than sleep, travel and eating; they get back over the borders they crossed illegally. Finger prints including those of children should be taken and they must be told any future illegal entry will be treated as a hostile act and will be dealt with by armed soldiers and police at the border or elsewhere.
    An alternative should be offered: training: military ) equipping those persons to fight for their home country. Battalions of refugee soldiers formed, male and female , in accordance with diversity and equal opportunities, then sent back into their countries of origin to fight for their country. We have a moral obligation to train them for combat to get their countries back. The training should be more than the traditional six weeks UK army training in certain circumstances. Family accommodation should be provided for these trainee soldiers. They should be treated in such circumstances as heroes.

  14. agricola
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 7:37 am | Permalink

    I assume that claims to family membership will be supported by DNA testing, ensuring that the claims are genuine. Remember that any illegal entry to the UK makes it harder in the eyes of the indigenous population to accept even genuine asylum seekers, because they are slow to differentiate.

    I also hope that the French will ship all economic migrants back whence they came while giving genuine refugees a new start to life in France.

    We in the UK need to take a much more rigorous response to those who enter the UK illegally. It needs to be demonstrated forcefully that the back of a lorry entry will almost certainly lead to them being shipped back to their country of origin within 48 hours. Then there are the estimated 2million illegals presently residing in the UK. They must be gathered in and returned to wherever they came from. I know that the ECHR , the ECJ, and many of our own ambulance chasing lawyers have been an obstacle to this to date, but there must be a dramatic change once we leave the EU.

    Only by having a tough immigration policy will you demonstrate the futility of trying to enter illegally, while at the same time encouraging a much more positive response to genuine refugees from the legal population.

  15. turboterrier
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 7:46 am | Permalink

    @alan Jutson

    Well said Alan.

    I wonder how many politicians actually visited and obtained and analysed the data before embarking on this decision allowing all these teenagers to come to the UK?

    Thank the Lord that the young men of England did not do a runner in 1939.

    Yet more burden for our education, welfare, benefits and housing departments.

    You cannot make this up.

  16. DaveK
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 7:50 am | Permalink

    Extract from Hansard:

    “In the year to September 2015, 1,570 unaccompanied asylum-seeking children arrived in the UK, and 61% of those children were 16 or over. Only 7% were 14 and under. I have to say that those figures surprised me when I read them, because when I thought of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children I thought of my grandson, who is five or six. As we have discussed in Questions before, a large number of that particular group come from certain areas such as Eritrea, which is not to say that Eritrea is not a country that people would want to leave because of their conscription and national service in an open-ended way. They also come from Albania and other countries. At the moment, Albania forms 632 while Eritrea forms 460 of the total unaccompanied asylum-seeking children, while Afghanistan forms 179 and Syria 118. I present that as simply an expansion on the designation and the general term of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children. In other words, are we actually helping those whom we want to help the most?

    Lord Green of Deddington: On that very point, is the Minister aware that something like 40% of these unaccompanied asylum-seeking children are involved in an age dispute? Quite often, those who claim to be 16 are found to be 18. The point is that many of them are older than one might think”.

    Does anyone remember a thing called a Trojan Horse?

  17. APL
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 7:51 am | Permalink

    JR: “The UK has said that it will take unaccompanied children who have family in the UK willing to look after them, ”

    I hope the ‘family members’ of these children will be referred to the authorities for child abandonment and neglect charges?

    There is actually, no reason these ‘children’ need arrive in the UK, they are already in a safe country – France, they can choose any of twenty six other countries in the European Union if they find France unpalatable.

    Please make a case why, the British tax payer should be forced to support any foreigner on Welfare – no, your claim that there are family members is not credible – and if there are they should as I said, be prosecuted anyway.

    What assurance can you give that lodging these unfortunate individuals with ‘family members’ won’t just be providing unpaid slave labor to the supposed ‘family’?

    Further, before they enter the country, I would like an assurance that they won’t automatically be granted British citizenship.

    Can you explain why, a British citizen is expected to buy a Passport at an outrageous cost, to queue up, suffer the indignity of a customs inspection, be subjected to security inspections, yet, some unknown individual can wash-up at Calais and demand entry to the UK with no papers, bonefides unknown?

    Will you politicians who make the decision, to allow these people entry be held personally liable for the conduct of each and every such individual that enters?

    By the way, the French have closed ‘the jungle’ before.

  18. APL
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 7:58 am | Permalink

    JR: “The UK has said that it will take unaccompanied children who have family in the UK willing to look after them,”

    Cameron has lots of houses, he was an eager participant in the destruction of Libya, and wanted to bomb the bejesus out of Syria. Perhaps we should reasonably expect him to take his fair share of children?

    JR: ” and will help the French by also taking some children who do not have family members who can take care of them. ”

    So you’ve agreed to take all the ‘children’.

  19. Bob
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 8:08 am | Permalink

    These “vulnerable children” look more like strapping young men to me.
    According to a foster carer calling to LBC yesterday, a 15 year old “child” refugee in her care during a dental checkup was discovered to have fully developed wisdom teeth. She said that assylum seekers self declare their age and the authorities are compelled to accept whatever they say.

    The government has redefined what a mansion is, what a crime is, it’s redefined marriage and now it appears to be redefining children.

    I guess if you can self identify your gender, then why shouldn’t a grown man be able to identify himself as a little boy (or little girl even). Strangely enough there didn’t appear to be any girls among the “child” refufees yesterday.

  20. Lifelogic
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 8:13 am | Permalink

    The danger is that more unaccompanied children will be further encouraged. You also undermine normal applications through the proper channels why make one if it is easier to take this short cut. Once they are in a safe country that country should deal with them. Anything else just tends to augment the problem and make things worse. It is far from easy to be kind without making things worse still.

    • alan jutson
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 10:32 pm | Permalink

      Lifelogic

      “…..You also undermine normal applications…..”

      Exactly, if their parents are already here, why do they not make a formal and official application, so they can come here legally and direct from their so called home, or second home if they are possibly staying with relatives.

  21. Edward.
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 8:25 am | Permalink

    I can’t recall the exact figures, the official inward numbers of new arrivals, are somewhere in the ballpark of 600, 000 are they not? Yes we can dispute that bogus idea of ‘net’ but in the main, in addition to these six hundred thousands – these numbers are said to be underestimated and it begs the question; how many, is too many?

    Secondly, another question, about Calais…..by hook and crook – they get in eventually and surely in reference to the above paragraph, don’t we do our bit anyway?

  22. Kenneth
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 8:45 am | Permalink

    Having the children come to the UK almost certainly condemns a new wave of children to danger and exploitation. This is inhumane and hard-hearted in my opinion.

    A much better idea – that will discourage more arrivals of children – is to agree with the French that we will send some family members to join the children and settle in France or the original country of entry if this is known.

  23. Bert Young
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 8:59 am | Permalink

    Calais is a French problem . Migrants should not have been allowed anywhere into Europe . Its no good trying to push the plight of the Calais “children” on to this country no matter what their status . Let the French get on with it .

  24. A different Simon
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 9:06 am | Permalink

    Is a moratorium going to have to be offered to parents who abandoned their children and entered the UK illegally ?

    One would have to question the morality of reuniting a child with a parent who did not leave the child in the care of a relative but neglected and abandoned them .

    It’s going to be impossible to verify whether people in the UK claiming to be family are .

    The child must continued to be monitored on an ongoing basis once they enter the UK or this could turn into a bonanza for opportunistic pedophiles .

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted October 19, 2016 at 8:11 am | Permalink

      We’ve already had that scenario in Rotherham and the authorities turned a blind eye.

  25. Juliet
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 9:08 am | Permalink

    News channels seldomly report on ‘closing of Calais’ story, and yesterday they very briefly touched on the arrivals of ‘unaccompanied Calais children’ in UK, one reporting on ITV showed one brother hugging another on arrival.

    Meanwhile on Twitter there has been a fan-fare celebrations that something is being done and more needs to be done. Charities have gone into overload on this. Putting emotions aside they forget the important issue here is the ‘children in Calais’. Because there a phenomenal number of tweets and comments raising confusion and concerns over the news media photos that referred to unaccompanied children.

    Many news articles previously, even up to early yesterday morning showed much younger vulnerable children aged between 3-9 playing in and around the Calais camps, and these were the images of the unaccompanied children due to arrive in UK. As for yesterday the arrivals, showed the actual 14 unaccompanied children being escorted in every news media, newspapers now as grown-up men

    The unaccompanied children in the press do not look like teenagers 11-17 or young children 5-10. They look like adult males posing as children. I think people expected to see young children of both sex 14-17 year old.

    Age of refugee children is a real concern, where are the babies-10 year olds
    why have we not carried out test, age of a person can be determined from blood and tooth samples

    • secretpeople
      Posted October 21, 2016 at 9:48 am | Permalink

      The Times, October 11th 2016:
      Ms Rudd said that the focus would initially be on children aged 12 and under

  26. Graham
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 9:20 am | Permalink

    Well that will be the excuse to let in a lot of migrants without too much fuss. French will have achieved their role in offloading onto the UK

    Sigh – good job I was only born yesterday or I would feel aggrieved.

  27. Nigel
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 9:30 am | Permalink

    Your last paragraph is wishful thinking. These “children” are sent alone on purpose and most without any passport or papers, so that they have a better opportunity to get in.

  28. Perception
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 9:36 am | Permalink

    How many persons are interviewing the young persons in Calais about eligibility? What are the nationalities of the interviewers? How old are they? Where do the interviewers live now? How long have they been resident? What social class are they? What social class were they?

    Here in the UK, it is perhaps more true now that a well-educated upper class person knows much more about the values and imperatives of a person of lower class of their own nationality (British ). This is not the case with those of developing countries and former communist countries in Eastern Europe. Class stratification is a blindfold and ear muff to the hearts and voices of those of their lower classes. They cannot read them effectively.
    Our upper/middle class is largely ineffective in reading the various types and stratifications of people from abroad How could it be otherwise? Does not environment and nurturing have any effect at all on perception? If not, pointless sending people to school!

  29. Enrico
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 9:48 am | Permalink

    How or why are all these immigrants arriving in Calais.Surely the French can either settle them in the place of entry to the country or send them back if they are economic migrants.From the pictures of the migrants they appear to be North African,not Syrian or Iraqi.
    Is our country going to be the (migrant home of last resort ed)of the world?

    • rose
      Posted October 19, 2016 at 9:14 am | Permalink

      “Is our country going to be the (migrant home of last resort ed)of the world?”

      I would say it has been the first choice for a long time now. Before that it was the USA but they aren’t so generous as we are.

  30. Ex-expat Colin
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 9:49 am | Permalink

    Calais closes? When do the rest suddenly, if not already… open? No words on prevention at the source is there.

  31. Jane Roberts
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 10:07 am | Permalink

    Almost all of those pictured seem to be far older than teenage. I really can’t believe that anybody has looked this closely enough. And what proof is there that they are really related to anybody in the UK? DNA tests, for example?
    As for younger unaccompanied children, has anybody asked how they made it from wherever in Asia or Africa all the way to Calais, by themselves? I just don’t believe that people smugglers would do it, compassion really doesn’t come into it where they are concerned. I think we are being taken fir a ride, big time.

  32. Tad Davison
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 10:26 am | Permalink

    Television coverage often shows would-be migrants to the UK throwing bricks and metal poles at lorries, and placing obstacles in their way to get them to stop. Lorry drivers are often then assaulted and their vehicles damaged.

    Given that the crime on our streets doesn’t reflect the official figures (ask anyone who lives in the real world), and it is increasingly harder to get the police to properly investigate crime due to insufficient numbers, do we really want the type of person in this country who would stoop to such things?

    etc ed
    Tad Davison

    Cambridge

  33. norman
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 10:31 am | Permalink

    Surely, not beyond the wit of man to solve, with genuine charity. We must first help the children, then do the assessments. This was done in the past with displaced persons, e.g. the Belgian exodus in WW1, most of whom returned home in due course. Britain had a good record in the past, but admittedly, its much more difficult now, as the waters are so muddied. The Third sector is often better at administering this, if the public sector is willing. One charity I know is airlifting many vulnerable Christian families out of conflict-zones, where they are also at risk of additional barbarity because of their faith – probably best not to mention which countries are involved, either source or destination. This may explain why the parents are so desperate to risk their children’s safety, in hope of a better future for them. We need to understand this.

    • Oggy
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

      But that’s the point – those we saw arriving yesterday are NOT children.

      • DaveM
        Posted October 19, 2016 at 6:38 am | Permalink

        Indeed. Is the government taking the p*** out of us or what? It’s like 5hey’re saying “we can do what we like regardless of what you want or think”.

        This is our home. Is the govt actually trying to incite public disorder?

  34. Denis Cooper
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 10:31 am | Permalink

    Just a snippet, off topic – a few words of wisdom from Mervyn King on October 4th 2016, explaining to a New York audience why he thought the economic effects of leaving the EU were exaggerated during the referendum campaign:

    https://youtu.be/uSMNGa60z4w?t=1361

    “After all … if I were to show you a diagram of the level of gross domestic product of the United Kingdom in the post-war period, and asked you to identify … what was the year that Britain joined the EU, for good or bad, you would not be able to identify it. And I think the same is going to be true in forty years’ time when we look back at the impact of the UK leaving the EU. So I think it is very important not to exaggerate the implications of all this.”

    • Qubus
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 9:21 pm | Permalink

      Thank you. One of the best discussions on Brexit that I have encountered.
      Eat your heart out “Question Time”.

    • alan jutson
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 10:43 pm | Permalink

      Dennis

      Very sensible comments indeed.

      Shame some of our Politicians do not listen and take note of his wisdom.

  35. Cpt Mannering
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 10:43 am | Permalink

    France should be asked if they wish us to guard their border with Germany. We realise they have historical problems with that.

  36. Oggy
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 11:06 am | Permalink

    The French have allowed this and other camps to fester and they are a result of French unwillingness to deal with the problem. Such a camp would never be tolerated here in the UK.
    I saw the pictures of these ‘children’ arriving here, all grown up young males one of whom was bald had a beard and moustache and looked 35 at least. I can’t help but feel someone is taking the mickey.
    Future problems will arise when the Human rights lawyers get involved and claim that all the ‘childrens’ immediate family should be shipped over here because they have a right to a ‘Family life’ . The ‘do gooders’ should be careful what they wish for.

    • turboterrier
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 9:08 pm | Permalink

      @Oggy

      Such a camp would never be tolerated here in the UK.

      You are having a laugh. Cause it would, all the do gooders and our lame politicians would allow it

      • Oggy
        Posted October 19, 2016 at 8:13 am | Permalink

        Well most of the public wouldn’t tolerate it, but yes you are right ‘the luvvies and dogooders’ would and they’d be there every day giving them their Food parcels with their misplaced sympathy, whilst our own people with their own problems get forgottten.

      • rose
        Posted October 19, 2016 at 9:18 am | Permalink

        The difference is that asylum seekers here are housed straight away and natives aren’t. So camps are springing up, gradually and more discreetly, on a smaller scale, with natives in the tents. Charities are giving out tents for this purpose..

  37. English Pensioner
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 11:09 am | Permalink

    Most of the ‘children’ shown in the media look as if they are over 18. In Sweden, following a number of rape cases in migrant centres, they X-Rayed the bones of some so-called children and medical experts decided that they were all well over 18 with one probably being over forty.
    As usual the sob-stories about the poor unaccompanied children are far from the truth. Also expect, once they are here, for the parents to suddenly ‘po-up’ in Calais and demand entry to join their ‘children’ on human rights grounds.

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 5:21 pm | Permalink

      To true English Pensioner. Why do they take the British public for fools?

  38. Headspace
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 11:56 am | Permalink

    I find it strange that in the uk, national guidance for youth work defines 13-19 year olds as youths. The UN defines youths as age 15 to 24. And yet the media calls 15 to 18 year old migrants as children.

    Could it be that “unaccompanied youths” doesn’t have the same ring of sympathy?

  39. lojolondon
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

    Good article, John, but it ignores the elephant in the room – none of the “children” seems to be under 6ft tall – all seem extremely robust and healthy for someone who has been fleeing for their life. I do hope that none of these people will be sent to secondary school in Britain, as the young boys and girls in their classes will certainly be put at risk.

  40. rose
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 12:08 pm | Permalink

    “Presumably some adult put the child on the long road to Calais and provided money to pay for the perilous journey. It would be good to know in each case who did this and what help they or other responsible adults in the family can now offer the child if they are not resident in a war zone.”

    Thanks to the folly and short-sightedness of Lord Williams, Lord Dubs, and anyone in Parliament who supported them, there will now be unlimited numbers of people in Africa and Asia sending “children” to the Channel coast. They have already reported a sharp increase in the numbers arriving at Calais.

    Alan Jutson asks what parent would leave their children behind. Well you only have to look at the photographs and film of columns and boatloads of unaccompanied men making their way to Northern Europe to understand that women and children in many parts of the world do not go first. Furthermore, children are not an expensive hobby: they are a resource. Where they are sent on ahead, it is with the intention of making a bridgehead. We have made clear to the world that immigrant families will be reunited and that unaccompanied “children” will be given preferential treatment over everyone else; so Africans and Asians wanting to move to the UK respond accordingly. Why is anyone shocked?

    David Cameron had the right priorities: he said we would take vetted families from the camps in the Near East, not from Calais. With a new Home Secretary (anxious to redeem her reputation with the left after the conference reporting?) and PM, all that has broken down.

    • rose
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

      PS We have tens of thousands of our own children classed as homeless, and tens of thousands waiting on council housing lists in our cities. We also have problems with our own children in care. How can Lord Williams and co possibly look down on the French in this regard and insist “children” are only safe here?

  41. Anonymous
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

    Those pictured being brought to Britain aren’t children.

    The authorities have taken us for fools again. We were given the impression that these were vulnerable under 10s.

  42. Remington Norman
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

    ‘The Calais camp is what happens when large numbers of migrants and refugees are allowed to enter the EU elsewhere without proper consideration of their legal rights and needs. ‘

    All very well John, but as I have always understood it, the EU law is clear: putative immigrants should be sent back to the first EU country of entry. To date neither the EU nor the UK have made any serious attempt to enforce this.

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 5:20 pm | Permalink

      Remington Norman. Exactly! Why are the Royal Navy and other groups rescuing these people and bringing them to our shores? They know we have a problem and yet they make it worse.

  43. Iain Gill
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 1:43 pm | Permalink

    On a personal level I’m sad because I used to do day trips to Calais and surrounds on the ferry. Would often just walk it at the other side. Would not do it now, as I wouldn’t regard it as safe, especially with children or old folk in tow.

    • alan jutson
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 10:50 pm | Permalink

      Iain

      Passed the jungle only a few weeks ago when travelling to and from France for a recent holiday.

      The amount of effort being put in place with massive fences, floodlights, police and armed soldiers at the port indicate the area is out of control.

      Aware now that it is going to be cleared, but then it was partly cleared only last year, and before that we had Sangette

      The problem was allowing them all in in unchecked the first place.

  44. Yudansha
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 3:07 pm | Permalink

    The Calais ‘children’ fiasco is yet another deliberate slap in the face from our own establishment.

    • Yudansha
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 10:59 pm | Permalink

      They are doing deliberately to show us they are still in charge after we had the impudence to vote for Brexit.

      • APL
        Posted October 19, 2016 at 7:36 am | Permalink

        I wrote in a comment recently, the Referendum result is only the interim result, we need to wrest control of the political process back from the grandees of each party, that includes the likes of Kenneth Clarke and, yes, John Redwood.

  45. Mark
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 3:23 pm | Permalink

    I think we should be told what steps have been taken to evaluate the kinship and age of those being admitted. Are they bothering with DNA testing and other medical assessments, or is there some agreement with the French to take a proportion of them that we are not party to? As others remark, these people do not appear to be as young as they claim, and perhaps we are being lied to as a matter of expediency.

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 5:18 pm | Permalink

      Mark. Replace ‘expediency’ for conspiracy.

  46. fedupsoutherner
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 4:22 pm | Permalink

    Well, from what I can see in the papers, these “children” certainly do not look like children. Why have family members and parents left them behind? Surely when they came to the UK if they were legal they would have brought them with them? None of them has any paperwork (no surprise there then) so we don’t know their true age and we don’t even know if they are really related to who they say they are or if it is yet another scam by trafficers. I suppose now it opens the door for more.

    What makes me angry is that last night they were showing a British family of 3 generations sharing a small house because the young woman with 2 children could not afford the local rents. Why are our people left in unsuitable accommodation while immigrants are often given new homes? This happened on the Isle of Bute. 12 homes were improved for these people yet we have nationals living in squalor. Sickening!

  47. David
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 5:04 pm | Permalink

    For 30 years I was a police officer in the Met, London, for 24 of those years in the rank of sergeant. Over the years the areas I worked were visited by the ‘traveller’ community. I could not estimate the many occasions I had a boy or girl before me who, it was obvious, were much older than 17, which was the age that, in law, they became adult. We called the Police Doctor who assessed their age by their physical development and bone structure. My suspicions were never contradicted but I’m just a normal guy with no specific qualifications. Most of the pics shown are that of adults. Don’t set Britain up for mockery again!

  48. acorn
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 5:28 pm | Permalink

    We should be thankful to the French for taking on the task of immigration control for English speaking migrants, looking to gain access to an English speaking area of the EU. In reality, the USA should be taking all these migrants; its 2003 invasion of Iraq, created this ongoing EU migration problem in the first place.

    Anyway, another unrecognised by Brexiteers problem, is that of the European Investment Bank. It has lent Britain a record 7.8 billion euros in 2015, part of a UK loan book of almost 50 billion Euros. Projects funded or approved for funding over the last two years range from power generation; improvements at the port of Dover and social housing in Northern Ireland. (HT: Politico)

    Unlike countries such as Germany and France, the UK doesn’t have a “State Bank” that funds development projects at home. “We need clarity relatively quickly as to how the UK envisages EIB lending activities in the run-up to its final exit from the EU” said Werner Hoyer, the EIB president. (The UK is a 16% capital funder of the EIB.)

    It would be a smart idea to nationalise RBS and make it the State Investment Bank for the UK. The Treasury has created large amounts of new “money” and transfused it into this zombie bank, nationalising it would be a much quicker way for the Treasury to get its money back as profits and taxes, rather than waiting for it to pay that money back as just taxes.

    PS. Keep in mind that “money” has no cost for the currency issuing Treasury; it has a bottomless pit full of the stuff. The Treasury can spend as much as it wants, up to the point where it exhausts the private sector’s capacity to supply. That is, where inflation starts to appear in any particular sub-sector of the economy.

    BTW. Don’t expect any Westminster politician to understand any of the above. 😉

  49. Margaret
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 5:47 pm | Permalink

    It is heart breaking. I would willingly take children in if it was an easy process , but it is never going to be that. Mothers out there sending their offspring on journeys into the unknown must be brave and feel devastated at the loss for what they think is their child’s only hope of survival. How misinformed!

  50. Chris
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

    Does this indicate Theresa May is backing down, Mr Redwood, or is it media hype?
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/722596/Brexit-deal-agreement-MPs-vote-new-EU-treaty-Brussels
    “MPs ‘very likely’ to get a vote on Brexit deal, shock announcement reveals
    MPs will get a vote on the final Brexit deal secured by the Government if the agreement leads to a new treaty with the EU, Downing Street has indicated…”

  51. Dancelikeabluebottle
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 7:00 pm | Permalink

    Yvette Cooper should rush to Calais while stocks last.

  52. Androcles
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 8:01 pm | Permalink

    Much is made of Britain’s proud record of taking in refugees but it is never pointed out that the kinder transport, the escapees from Russian pogroms, the Huegenots were not a burden on the tax payer. A tax payer who does not want to pay for supposed refugees is taking a position no different from a person deciding what charity to support – and should not be pilloried by the compassion signallers.

    • rose
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 11:12 pm | Permalink

      Not only were they not a burden on the taxpayer: they were very few in number and they came from Europe. Also, their arrival was staggered over many years.

    • Mitchel
      Posted October 19, 2016 at 9:09 am | Permalink

      Anyone who thinks that the Tsarist era pogroms were a mini holocaust which seems to be received wisdom in the west needs to do a bit of research.They were violent riots,with relatively few actual deaths,arising out of discrimination,deepening poverty partly caused by explosive population growth and the prohibition on movement into Greater Russia;hence the exodus Westwards.

  53. 74b2b
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 8:47 pm | Permalink

    Everyone’s slowly getting it. Very slowly.
    Their agenda is to abolish individual countries.

    • NA
      Posted October 22, 2016 at 5:46 pm | Permalink

      Everyone’s slowly getting it. Very slowly.
      Their agenda is to abolish individual countries.

      >
      While humming ‘Imagine’ by John Lennon.

  54. turboterrier
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 8:51 pm | Permalink

    Slightly OT.

    If the reports in the daily Express are even remotely true it would seem the Prime Minister is going to give a vote to Westminster on the terms agreed.

    this will be start of the biggest stitch up to the electorate in history and there will be 17million and few more who see the real calibre of our so called leaders. They sit in their ivory towers and pass judgements on the people with little or no regard to as what it is that the people really want. They don’t have to give a st**f as the chances is hat in 5 years they will be operating in new pastures whilst it is the electorate that picks up the tab. There are very few withany principles and even less pride in the shower that we have at Westminster at the moment. This country is being controlled by the financial markets, renewable energy believers, the USA and in some measures the industrial might of Germany. With the Italian economy going down the tubes with other southern European members fighting against being second and third what do we hear from our illustrious politicians highlighting these facts? Three fifths of nothing. Our PM does not have the support in the rank and file out here in the real world and there are too many remainers within the cabinet. There are too many brexiteers with sound credentials sitting on the back benches banging their gums together not able to do anything to really impact on us getting out. The whole affair is sliding into a farce and the real power players can and will not do anything to stop it as they have no belief in this country and its people that we can survive and prosper without the assistance of the EU bloc controlling us. If the politicians showed a united front then maybe the media would get off of our backs. If the remainers had won would they put up with all this nonsense “In your dreams”
    Biggest **** up since Mons.

    • Yudansha
      Posted October 18, 2016 at 11:00 pm | Permalink

      Open defiance of Brexit is the second best thing to Brexit. It is still a better position than we had this time last year.

      • Roy Grainger
        Posted October 19, 2016 at 6:44 am | Permalink

        As the Commons vote on Brexit terms would be just before the 2020 election (assuming there is not one before) it would be interesting to see how Labour MPs would vote, I doubt some of them would dare vote against.

  55. turboterrier
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 9:03 pm | Permalink

    Another OT

    Headlines in the mail> £164 green Tax on Energy bills.

    Another promise to remove subsidies from our illustrious politicians to stop more people joining the millions already suffering from fuel debt and poverty. Can this lot do anything to make things better for the masses? If Westminster governed instead of posing with all this so called promise we might start to drag this country back up by it’s boot laces.

    Anyone heard about the national debt and how much we are into hock lately?

    Run a country they couldn’t run fifty yards!!

  56. anon
    Posted October 18, 2016 at 10:36 pm | Permalink

    Calais is in France.

    After the absolute mess of immigration and its abuse by the establishment.

    I honestly no longer believe anything they say. We should take a hard headed approach here. The people to blame for this are those who have not enforced our border laws in the past. If they are not children, they should be charged in France and deported from France.

    Each case should be vetted by France who then should deal with the issues including child endangerment etc. If the parents are in England deport them to France.

    We cannot be treating people who have contributed nothing better than UK citizens who are in difficulty or need. This is what is happening in reality unless you can afford a private solution.

  57. Gina Dean
    Posted October 19, 2016 at 5:18 am | Permalink

    So we are being stitched up again, we took in the Sangatte crowd last time. This time it’s males posing as children. It will not take to long before there is another group on our doorstep. We will start again with the luvvies saying what we should do more.
    Why is it that once they get here everything is thrown at them.
    Employ ex service in the border control, they have no illusion about refugees.

  58. NoMoreEU
    Posted October 19, 2016 at 10:13 am | Permalink

    Crows’ feet around the eyes, receding hairlines, and really strong facial hair, should be obvious to any official with 20/20 vision, and flag up a possible problem.

  59. Jane
    Posted October 19, 2016 at 10:14 am | Permalink

    Not at all happy with the system. Firstly, many of those who arrived this week are clearly not youngsters so we must introduce a system to determine age. Secondly, one youngster (14 years)was reunited with his elder brother whom he has not seen for eleven years. He is going in to foster care which says a lot for family ties. Why is he not living with his brother? What a mess……

  60. NoMoreEU
    Posted October 19, 2016 at 8:03 pm | Permalink

    The whole affair is very ‘fishy’.

    Rudd has been ‘done up like a kipper’ – and not the UKIP variety!

  61. Lindsay McDougall
    Posted October 19, 2016 at 8:58 pm | Permalink

    If someone whom we do not want to enter UK succeeds in entering UK, to where do we return them (escpecially if they have thrown away their travel documents)?

    How about abolishing immigration entirely and just issuing one year residence permits, renewable annually?

  62. secretpeople
    Posted October 21, 2016 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

    My (Labour) MP has just sent this in an email:

    My colleague Stella Creasy is working to secure a cross-party amendment to the Children and Social Work Bill which is currently progressing through Parliament, which would force the Home Secretary to publish a strategy for the safeguarding of unaccompanied refugee children and how they can access the protection of the Dubs amendment. The aim is to ensure that all unaccompanied refugee children in Calais, and elsewhere in Europe, are brought to the UK, and assessed by local authorities under their child safeguarding duties.

    I don’t know about those at Calais, but reading that has aged me by about 10 years..

    This can’t be allowed to happen. All unaccompanied ‘children’? From the whole of Europe? To come to the UK?

    • James Matthews
      Posted October 21, 2016 at 8:46 pm | Permalink

      Terrifying deluded irresponsibility or malice (yet people elected her).

      Please note relative brevity.

      • rose
        Posted October 23, 2016 at 12:06 pm | Permalink

        This terrifying deluded irresponsibility or malice extends to many MPs, peers, journalists and broadcasters. Academics too, clergy, and members of the public. A deathwish seems to have gripped the country. I can understand when the mad preaching is coming from Wales or Scotland because they don’t have a problem as England does. But from London?

        On the subject of safety, how come these young men are being put with foster mothers and into classrooms with nothing being known about them? Or into children’s homes? I have to have a CRB check just to mentor a teenager in my choir in a room full of 180 people.

  63. NA
    Posted October 22, 2016 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

    Just keep in mind that terrorism is over hyped, intentionally. We are living in an age of propaganda (legalized) which has resulted in a sequence of staged terrorist attacks, Putin also wants us to have Islam as enemy number 1 not him, so RT will not expose it. Only when it directly affects them like the staged chemical weapons attack.

    The real fear for the Left is conservative values, alot of immigrants are not ISIS supporters but most have conservative values.

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page